Joe Hughes > Quotes

“the genesis which moved from microperception to sense was called the dynamic genesis. In Anti-Oedipus, this same process was called ‘desiring-production’. In The Logic of Sense, the genesis which moved from sense to propositions and their three dimensions was called the static genesis. In Anti-Oedipus, this genesis was called ‘social-production’.”
― Joe Hughes, Deleuze and the Genesis of Representation

“The metaphysical surface which unfurls in the failure of recognition is called “the virtual” (DR), the “impersonal transcendental field” (LS, PI), the “plane of immanence” (WP), the time-image (C2), the diagram (FB), and so on. It,”
― Joe Hughes, Philosophy After Deleuze

“Deleuze’s vision of thought is not that of a thought which “measures, limits and moulds life,”34 but one which is the “affirmative power of life”
― Joe Hughes, Philosophy After Deleuze

“This indirection further disrupts our habits of reading and requires that we develop new techniques for making sense of Deleuze’s texts. This ventriloquism has obvious relations to my two previous propositions. In accordance with the first, there is no goodwill in Deleuze’s historical commentaries. We can never expect Deleuze to efface himself from his commentary and try to present Nietzsche, for example, as clearly as possible. And this becomes even more apparent in its conformity with the second proposition—that because of the mobility of language we can never be certain about the meaning of words. One of the immediate consequences of Deleuze’s ventriloquism is that certain words—and usually names—become unsettled: when Deleuze says, “Nietzsche says. . .” does the proper name actually refer to Nietzsche or to Deleuze?”
― Joe Hughes, Philosophy After Deleuze

“parts not being organs, but the anatomical parts of those organs).”10 The words “form” and “structure” connote rigidity, but this form is neither static nor rigid. “The relation that characterizes an existing mode as a whole is endowed with a kind of elasticity,”11”
― Joe Hughes, Philosophy After Deleuze

“The finite will no longer be a limitation of the infinite; rather, the infinite will be an overcoming [dépassement] of the finite. . . . The infinite is no longer separable from an act of overcoming finitude.72 The infinite is now a process of self-transcendence and nothing more.73 It becomes the constitutive “and” of things.”
― Joe Hughes, Philosophy After Deleuze

“This is because our “essence” is fundamentally creative of new possibilities for life. Deleuze’s ethics, you could say, constitute a perfectionism without a concept of the perfect.3”
― Joe Hughes, Philosophy After Deleuze

“recourse to concepts. Deleuze’s passive syntheses are passive in both senses. They are passive in the first sense insofar as they take place “in the mind,” but are not carried out “by the mind.”27 But they are also preconceptual. There is no law regulating them.”
― Joe Hughes, Philosophy After Deleuze

“Deleuze and Hegel both work through a similar problem: what is the movement of thought. But Hegel tried to represent the movement of thought and this led to overly broad concepts. Instead, one must become the Nietzschean philosopher-artist and try to write in such a way that the reader’s mind is directly affected by the work, not at the level of representation and its concepts but at the much more chaotic and unstable level of the text’s moving signs. Deleuze is not content to tell us about his new image of thought. He wants us to live it.”
― Joe Hughes, Philosophy After Deleuze

“At the core of Deleuze’s ethics was the thinker who affirms life, carries thought and life toward new possibilities, and who Deleuze calls in a Nietzschean idiom, “the artist.” Conversely, at the core of Deleuze’s aesthetics, we rediscover the problem of ethics insofar as the vocation of the artist is the positive invention of new possibilities for life.”
― Joe Hughes, Philosophy After Deleuze

“Composition, composition is the sole definition of art.”
― Joe Hughes, Philosophy After Deleuze

“There are also two times: Aion and Chronos.12 Much of Deleuze’s book builds on the work of Maurice Blanchot—so much so that it would not be an overstatement to say that The Logic of Sense is a formalization and systematization of much of Blanchot’s thought, even though at times it leaves the context of that thought altogether.13 This is above all true in relation to the two readings of time. Throughout The Space of Literature and The Book to Come, Blanchot describes two kinds of time.14 First,”
― Joe Hughes, Deleuze and the Genesis of Representation

“and Nietzsche, Deleuze arrives at conceptual productions that I would unhesitatingly qualify as monotonous, composing a very particular regime of emphasis or almost infinite repetition of a limited repertoire of concepts, as well as a virtuosic variation of names, under which what is thought remains essentially identical.32”
― Joe Hughes, Philosophy After Deleuze

“The easy answer to this question would be to say that Deleuze’s perspectives are determined by problems and that problems are the signs of certain encounters. But”
― Joe Hughes, Philosophy After Deleuze

“of it however, it has to find conditions in which it is no longer overcome by incoming data.”
― Joe Hughes, Deleuze and the Genesis of Representation

“line of flight’,”
― Joe Hughes, Deleuze and the Genesis of Representation

“qualitative synthesis of diversity, the static synthesis of qualitative diversity related to an object supposed the same for all the faculties of a single subject.”88 In other words, common sense relates diversity—the manifold—to an individuated object and to an individuated subject. And like good sense, it operates by subjecting the passive self to the guidance of an Idea.89”
― Joe Hughes, Philosophy After Deleuze

“will be an overcoming [dépassement] of the finite. Moreover, it is a property of the finite to surpass and go beyond itself. The notion of self-overcoming [auto-dépassement] begins to be developed in philosophy. It will traverse all of Hegel and will reach into Nietzsche. The infinite is no longer separable from an act of overcoming finitude because only finitude can overcome itself.16”
― Joe Hughes, Philosophy After Deleuze

“From the perspective of this deduction and its Bergsonist vocabulary, it is difficult to understand what role cinema might play in all of this.”
― Joe Hughes, Philosophy After Deleuze

“When we open on to the plane of immanence our individuality fades. Objectivity and subjectivity vanish. We confront impersonality. We no longer have a name. But at the same time we can be mistaken for no other person: our life is “impersonal yet singular.” As Dickens remarks, the “spark of life is curiously separable” from Riderhood. Even so, the spark in question is indubitably Riderhood’s, and not, for example, the doctor’s. The aleatory point is simultaneously our cogito, but it does not answer to our name.”
― Joe Hughes, Philosophy After Deleuze

“that this moment of failure marks, as Deleuze and Guattari say in What is Philosophy? an essential “I do not know” which becomes “positive and creative, the condition of creation itself”.44”
― Joe Hughes, Philosophy After Deleuze

“The understanding is built on the synthesis of imagination (or apprehension) with memory (or reproduction).”
― Joe Hughes, Philosophy After Deleuze

“runs through and gathers together the forces which affect the will, or what Deleuze refers to later in the text (and in a Freudian idiom) as “excitations.”61 The second synthesis is “the reproduction of diversity,” and it functions by automatically retaining “mnemonic traces” of excitations.62 It thus corresponds, roughly, to Kant’s synthesis of reproduction.”
― Joe Hughes, Philosophy After Deleuze

“Minds communicate to each other only the conventional,”11 Deleuze writes in Proust and Signs, “only the conventional is explicit.”12 Direct, honest discourse, and the clarity we hope it brings, relies on conventions.”
― Joe Hughes, Philosophy After Deleuze

“genetic and productive.”33 It will have to account for the possibility of a subjectivity which will emerge from life.”
― Joe Hughes, Philosophy After Deleuze

“forms concepts which do not have a correlate in experience, the idea of God for example: “The idea of God is in a sense opposed to common notions in that they always apply to things that can be imagined, while God cannot be imagined.”39 Put only slightly differently, the understanding forms concepts which can be applied to experience. Reason forms concepts under which all experience belongs but which can never be an object of experience or Ideas.40”
― Joe Hughes, Philosophy After Deleuze

“merely aesthetic. It is also a major characteristic of his account of perception. We can see this if we note that “composition” is a complex word in this context. What Deleuze and Guattari directly mean in What is Philosophy? is simply that art pertains to what they call the “plane of composition.”
― Joe Hughes, Philosophy After Deleuze

“Deleuze again characterized his project as one of taking up the “Kantian initiative” and carrying it to completion.4 Even those texts which do not explicitly claim to complete the Kantian enterprise are very obviously concerned with it. Deleuze’s Hume, for example, consistently returns to and develops major Kantian themes. His Proust is concerned with developing a Kantian doctrine of the faculties.5 Deleuze’s Spinoza moves toward a Kantian theory of ideas and even a latent schematism.”
― Joe Hughes, Philosophy After Deleuze

“The implication of this double question is that the body is not a static form, but a dynamic or plastic form. It is a form that is subject to affections, some of which agree with it and some of which disagree, and it internalizes these affections and is modified by them.”
― Joe Hughes, Philosophy After Deleuze

“This genetic line ends in representation— in the “object supposed to be both real and the end of our actions.”92 Every object, Deleuze says, is defined by two things: “the quality or qualities which it possesses, the extension which it occupies.”93 These two characteristics—quality and extensity—are the basic “elements of representation.”94 They are the central coordinates of the “perceptual world.”95 The basic units of “propositions of consciousness.”
― Joe Hughes, Philosophy After Deleuze