Cosa può un corpo?: Lezioni su Spinoza

by Gilles Deleuze, Aldo Pardi (Traduttore)

Deleuze ha avuto con Spinoza un rapporto appassionato. Gli ha dedicato pagine intense, dalle quali traspaiono la bellezza e le difficoltà che spesso hanno gli incontri inusuali, quelli che fanno intraprendere strade sconosciute e indicano modi nuovi di vedere le cose. Tutta l'opera di Deleuze è attraversata da una tensione febbrile, e spesso si viene spiazzati dagli scarti fulminei di un pensiero che si spinge sempre oltre. Quando Deleuze si occupa di Spinoza, questo effetto di disorientamento è ancora più forte. Quello che ci troviamo di fronte, infatti, non è più l'autore che siamo abituati a conoscere attraverso una lunga tradizione interpretativa. Un'intera costellazione concettuale, che pure ci orientava, salta, aprendoci nuovi e imprevedibili orizzonti. Il volume presenta le lezioni su Spinoza pronunciate da Deleuze all'Università di Vincennes tra il novembre del 1980 e il marzo del 1981. La riflessione critica sul filosofo olandese è stata sempre fondamentale nello sviluppo dell'opera di Deleuze, un riferimento costante che ne ha accompagnato e segnato l'intera produzione. Questi seminari ci offrono perciò l'opportunità di entrare nel laboratorio filosofico di Deleuze, di osservare in presa diretta come, attraverso il lavoro di smontaggio e rimontaggio compiuto sui principali concetti spinoziani, egli giunga progressivamente a codificare le categorie che hanno fatto del suo pensiero un "unico" nel panorama filosofico contemporaneo.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction

217 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2010

About the author

Deleuze is a key figure in poststructuralist French philosophy. Considering himself an empiricist and a vitalist, his body of work, which rests upon concepts such as multiplicity, constructivism, difference and desire, stands at a substantial remove from the main traditions of 20th century Continental thought. His thought locates him as an influential figure in present-day considerations of society, creativity and subjectivity. Notably, within his metaphysics he favored a Spinozian concept of a plane of immanence with everything a mode of one substance, and thus on the same level of existence. He argued, then, that there is no good and evil, but rather only relationships which are beneficial or harmful to the particular individuals. This ethics influences his approach to society and politics, especially as he was so politically active in struggles for rights and freedoms. Later in his career he wrote some of the more infamous texts of the period, in particular, Anti-Oedipus and A Thousand Plateaus. These texts are collaborative works with the radical psychoanalyst Félix Guattari, and they exhibit Deleuze’s social and political commitment.

Gilles Deleuze began his career with a number of idiosyncratic yet rigorous historical studies of figures outside of the Continental tradition in vogue at the time. His first book, Empirisism and Subjectivity, is a study of Hume, interpreted by Deleuze to be a radical subjectivist. Deleuze became known for writing about other philosophers with new insights and different readings, interested as he was in liberating philosophical history from the hegemony of one perspective. He wrote on Spinoza, Nietzche, Kant, Leibniz and others, including literary authors and works, cinema, and art. Deleuze claimed that he did not write “about” art, literature, or cinema, but, rather, undertook philosophical “encounters” that led him to new concepts. As a constructivist, he was adamant that philosophers are creators, and that each reading of philosophy, or each philosophical encounter, ought to inspire new concepts. Additionally, according to Deleuze and his concepts of difference, there is no identity, and in repetition, nothing is ever the same. Rather, there is only difference: copies are something new, everything is constantly changing, and reality is a becoming, not a being.

He often collaborated with philosophers and artists as Félix Guattari, Michel Foucault, Guy Hocquenghem, René Schérer, Carmelo Bene, François Châtelet, Olivier Revault d'Allonnes, Jean-François Lyotard, Georges Lapassade, Kateb Yacine and many others.

Reviews

[Bobparr · Rating 4 out of 5]

Non che dopo questa lettura abbia capito meglio Spinoza. Intanto, per capire uno, bisogna conoscerlo. Qui già parto disarmato. Poi, Deleuze ha una comprensione cosi’ viscerale dell’Etica che parlare di essenza e affetti è talmente normale che passa tutte le dieci lezioni a spiegarci di cosa sta parlando. Ecco quello che ho trovato affascinante in queste trascrizioni: il modo in cui il docente docet. Lo fa con passione e trasporto, ed io rimango conquistato da queste lezioni, e lo leggo assorto, con la stessa espressione e comprensione di una mucca al pascolo che guarda l’orizzonte.

[Charles · Rating 5 out of 5]

These are the edited French transcripts of the 14 1/2 sessions that Deleuze devoted to Spinoza between Nov. 1980 and March 1981. I will be translating this text into English for the University of Minnesota Press, having contributed already to translations of the unedited transcripts, all available on the Deleuze Seminars site (deleuze.cla.purdue.edu). At the time of this seminar, Deleuze had just published a book, translated subsequently as Spinoza: Practical Philosophy, and many of these sessions draw from material published in this text, most notably the study of ontology in Spinoza as well as the question of good and evil, debated in Spinoza's correspondence with Willem van Blyenbergh. Sur Spinoza (and the subsequent translation) present these topics with judicious editing of numerous redundancies and occasional confusing moments due to Deleuze's phrasing. All in all, this is an extremely accessible introduction to Spinoza and, in some ways, a guide to reading Spinoza's Ethics. NB. My multiple reading dates indicates the steps towards completing the translation (for U of Minnesota Press) as On Spinoza. I submitted the completed manuscript on Sept 22, 2025, so perhaps we will see the new translation by fall 2026 (sooner, I hope).

[Loïc · Rating 3 out of 5]

Je n’ai pas compris grand chose, mais j’ai tout lu ! Et ce n’était ma foi pas désagréable. Ç'aurait sans doute été encore mieux en comprenant, mais on ne peut pas tout avoir.