What do you think?
Rate this book
Derrames: Entre el capitalismo y la esquizofrenia
Cómo se lee esto? Hay que hacer una experimentación e ir obteniendo un método. "Siempre se trata de flujos", dice Deleuze. ¿Qué hacer con ese enunciado para que no se vuelva de sujeto a sujeto? Una especie de retroactiva, de rebote inmediato, de líquido que reviente contra el punto después de la palabra "flujos" y retorne como una ola sobre el enunciado manteniéndolo líquido.
No es tan fácil leer. No es preguntarse quién lo dice, cuál su sentido, qué significará ese concepto. No es tan fácil leer un experimento de escritura. Se requiere un experimento de lectura, que es una cosa mucho más rara.
Derrames entre el capitalismo y la esquizofrenia es la primera edición castellana de clases de Gilles Deleuze en torno a los problemas, los conceptos y las tesis que constituyen la serie El Anti-Edipo/Mil Mesetas.
Desde su singular interpretación del modo en que funciona el capitalismo y su ensamble histórico con el psicoanálisis en el terreno de la producción deseante y la producción de enunciados; a través del recorrido de experiencias concretas -cotidianas, clínicas, biológicas, musicales, literarias- y la producción conceptual para pensarlas, Deleuze se lanza sobre aquello que da continuidad a la serie Capitalismo y Esquizofrenia, y quizás a toda su obra: la búsqueda de modos y conceptos para un pensamiento materialista e intensivo que acompañe las experimentaciones inconscientes, sociales y políticas de nuestra época.
No es tan fácil leer. No es preguntarse quién lo dice, cuál su sentido, qué significará ese concepto. No es tan fácil leer un experimento de escritura. Se requiere un experimento de lectura, que es una cosa mucho más rara.
Derrames entre el capitalismo y la esquizofrenia es la primera edición castellana de clases de Gilles Deleuze en torno a los problemas, los conceptos y las tesis que constituyen la serie El Anti-Edipo/Mil Mesetas.
Desde su singular interpretación del modo en que funciona el capitalismo y su ensamble histórico con el psicoanálisis en el terreno de la producción deseante y la producción de enunciados; a través del recorrido de experiencias concretas -cotidianas, clínicas, biológicas, musicales, literarias- y la producción conceptual para pensarlas, Deleuze se lanza sobre aquello que da continuidad a la serie Capitalismo y Esquizofrenia, y quizás a toda su obra: la búsqueda de modos y conceptos para un pensamiento materialista e intensivo que acompañe las experimentaciones inconscientes, sociales y políticas de nuestra época.
- GenresPhilosophy
384 pages, Paperback
First published May 1, 2005
19 people are currently reading
133 people want to read
About the author
Gilles Deleuze
262 books2,625 followersDeleuze 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.
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.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
October 30, 2023
While I exaggerate a bit with the use of reading this, I have the translations in French and English to all these texts (available on deleuze.cla.purdue.edu), so I can attest to their highly creditable status as Spanish language access to the 1971 into 1979 texts available on Anti-Oedipus and A Thousand Plateaus. Please note that none of these transcripts correspond to extant recordings (as all transcripts from fall 1979 do), hence are dependent solely on the transcriptions which cannot be verified.
In Part I, corresponding to the 9 1971-72 seminar, Classes 1, 2, 3 each omit small bits (several paragraphs) from the available transcripts; Class 4 omits the end conversation between Deleuze and "Eric" as well as shifting one small part of the text (several paragraphs) to a different location in the text (as compared to the transcript); what would be Class 5 (and is such in the seminars) is instead presented not as a class session but as an Annex to the book’s first section, in three parts; no problems with the volume's Class 5; the volume's Class 6 simply fails to indicate two separate interruptions in the transcript, presenting the discussion as one continuous flow; no issues with the volume's Class 7; the volume's Class 8 only contains the first part, with the final part, “Body without Organs”, shifted to part 4 of the section 1 Derrames Annex, containing the entire text except the final sentence. In Part II, corresponding to the 5 sessions of 1972-73 seminar, all 5 sessions are edited so that most student interventions are simply dropped including the opening one in Class 9, while in Class 13, the text ends with the reference to Foucault, the “space of dispersion”, dropping a brief final exchange with students; in Part III, corresponding to 3 sessions in winter-spring 1974, Classes 14 & 15 lose several students comments and exchanges, while in Class 16, a number of brief sections get dropped, as well as the indications (contained in the French transcripts) of "a long discussion begins" and "the discussion continues", clearly not worthy of transcription at the time by the anonymous transcribers; the final text of Part III corresponds to one session in 1977 (Feb 15) as Class 17 here, and drops one student exchange; the reason why Class 17 is separated from the following texts, in Part IV, is that they all deal in some ways with musical themes: Class 18 (8 March 77) continues to omit certain exchanges with students including a "long discussion on the death instinct" at the end; Class 19 (3 May 1977) is mostly a lecture by Richard Pinhas (the WebDeleuze creator, where the transcripts originally appeared), with some of Deleuze's questions omitted; and Class 20 (27 Feb 1979) is the sole lecture from the 78-79 academic year, fairly accurate vis-a-vis the transcript.
In Part I, corresponding to the 9 1971-72 seminar, Classes 1, 2, 3 each omit small bits (several paragraphs) from the available transcripts; Class 4 omits the end conversation between Deleuze and "Eric" as well as shifting one small part of the text (several paragraphs) to a different location in the text (as compared to the transcript); what would be Class 5 (and is such in the seminars) is instead presented not as a class session but as an Annex to the book’s first section, in three parts; no problems with the volume's Class 5; the volume's Class 6 simply fails to indicate two separate interruptions in the transcript, presenting the discussion as one continuous flow; no issues with the volume's Class 7; the volume's Class 8 only contains the first part, with the final part, “Body without Organs”, shifted to part 4 of the section 1 Derrames Annex, containing the entire text except the final sentence. In Part II, corresponding to the 5 sessions of 1972-73 seminar, all 5 sessions are edited so that most student interventions are simply dropped including the opening one in Class 9, while in Class 13, the text ends with the reference to Foucault, the “space of dispersion”, dropping a brief final exchange with students; in Part III, corresponding to 3 sessions in winter-spring 1974, Classes 14 & 15 lose several students comments and exchanges, while in Class 16, a number of brief sections get dropped, as well as the indications (contained in the French transcripts) of "a long discussion begins" and "the discussion continues", clearly not worthy of transcription at the time by the anonymous transcribers; the final text of Part III corresponds to one session in 1977 (Feb 15) as Class 17 here, and drops one student exchange; the reason why Class 17 is separated from the following texts, in Part IV, is that they all deal in some ways with musical themes: Class 18 (8 March 77) continues to omit certain exchanges with students including a "long discussion on the death instinct" at the end; Class 19 (3 May 1977) is mostly a lecture by Richard Pinhas (the WebDeleuze creator, where the transcripts originally appeared), with some of Deleuze's questions omitted; and Class 20 (27 Feb 1979) is the sole lecture from the 78-79 academic year, fairly accurate vis-a-vis the transcript.
August 9, 2022
Clases que ayudan a comprender el AntiEdipo
June 21, 2023
Muy bueno, me ha servido para refrescar conceptos del Antiedipo y del Mil Mesetas.
January 9, 2020
Bourdieu parafraseaba a Foucault para hablar sobre la imposibilidad del “libro” como estructura de conocimiento. Sucede a menudo que cuando el autor ha publicado un trabajo, su pensamiento ya ha evolucionado.
Leer a Deleuze es recibir un mazo en la cabeza, pues estamos expuestos a repensar hasta el acto más simple de nuestros días como hacer touch en una pantalla. Sin embargo, leerlo mientras imparte cátedra es otra cosa.
Si la “forma libro” es una instancia productora de enunciados, la clase de Deleuze es entonces el agenciamiento en el que los enunciados se producen. Aquí vemos a un Gilles que intenta, por una parte, llevar más lejos lo vertido en “El Antiedipo” y tender un puente hacia “Mil mesetas”.
Muchas veces, Deleuze se verá en aprietos por lo profundo de las participaciones de su clase, particularmente de Richard Pinhas, e intentará llevar su modelo rizomático de pensamiento.
Aquí se habla de todo: psicoanálisis, economía, clases sociales, embriología, cine y música, entre mil otros temas. Lo anterior es muestra del rigor intelectual del autor francés, quien en “Imagen-tiempo” dirá que el objetivo de un discurso es apuntar a un todo inaprensible, pero latente en los componentes de un sistema.
Leer a Deleuze es recibir un mazo en la cabeza, pues estamos expuestos a repensar hasta el acto más simple de nuestros días como hacer touch en una pantalla. Sin embargo, leerlo mientras imparte cátedra es otra cosa.
Si la “forma libro” es una instancia productora de enunciados, la clase de Deleuze es entonces el agenciamiento en el que los enunciados se producen. Aquí vemos a un Gilles que intenta, por una parte, llevar más lejos lo vertido en “El Antiedipo” y tender un puente hacia “Mil mesetas”.
Muchas veces, Deleuze se verá en aprietos por lo profundo de las participaciones de su clase, particularmente de Richard Pinhas, e intentará llevar su modelo rizomático de pensamiento.
Aquí se habla de todo: psicoanálisis, economía, clases sociales, embriología, cine y música, entre mil otros temas. Lo anterior es muestra del rigor intelectual del autor francés, quien en “Imagen-tiempo” dirá que el objetivo de un discurso es apuntar a un todo inaprensible, pero latente en los componentes de un sistema.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews