Deleuzian Concepts: Philosophy, Colonization, Politics

by Paul Patton

These essays provide important interpretations and analyze critical developments of the political philosophy of Gilles Deleuze. They situate his thought in the contemporary intellectual landscape by comparing him with contemporaries such as Derrida, Rorty, and Rawls and show how elements of his philosophy may be usefully applied to key contemporary issues including colonization and decolonization, the nature of liberal democracy, and the concepts and critical utopian aspirations of political philosophy. Patton discusses Deleuze's notion of philosophy as the creation of concepts and shows how this may be helpful in understanding the nature of political concepts such as rights, justice, and democracy. Rather than merely commenting on or explaining Deleuze's thought, Patton offers a series of attempts to think with Deleuzian concepts in relation to other philosophers and other problems. His book represents a significant contribution to debates in contemporary political theory, continental philosophy, and Deleuzian studies.

Genres: Philosophy

272 pages, Hardcover

First published May 19, 2010

Reviews

[Önder Kurt · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book was very helpful for me to finally have some associations for certain hard-grasp deleuzian concepts like “pure events”, “plane of immanence”, “machinic assemblages” “absolute/relative deterritorialization” etc, however its main endeavour, namely to integrate Deleuze into liberal democratic theory was not convincing, if not totally illegitimate. This sounds like taming the radical, disruptive essence of Deleuzian philosophy.

I cannot conceive such a radical philosophy -which strictly opposes any sort of representation- within liberal democratic coordinates. Despites all his efforts, I think Patton is not successful againts Menguet’s claims that Deleuze is against the common conception of Democracy..

Menguet’s picture of Deleueze seems closer to real and radical Deleuze to me, despite the fact that Menguet brings his arguememts against Deleuze. I don’t think Patton is justified in his defense of Deleuze. He does not need such defense. I dont think Deleuze can be incorporated in stale liberal, identity politics.

[Alex Lee · Rating 4 out of 5]

From the translator of Difference and Repetition, Paul Patton takes on Deleuze as a thinker, and sums up much of his work, comparing him to Derrida and (surprise) American analytic philosophers like Rawls and Rorty. Patton also brings to light the scattered understandings of Deleuze about the event, a specific principle not often spoken of when examining Deleuze's work. I thought much of Patton's examination aggressive, intense and very interesting -- certainly an above par review of Deleuzian concepts, although not complete in the sense that most books on Deleuze concentrate on one or two of his ideas, eschewing an examination of the complete picture.

The application of American philosophers then, is a way in which Patton "applies" Deleuze, allowing us to step back from the hypnotic twists of Deleuzian language and see where this particular kind of conceptual arrangement can get us. This is far from a complete exposition however, and it may be likely that Patton decided to concentrate on lesser examined concepts of Deleuze in order to streamline the book and present a stronger punch. Still, I like his exposition of Deleuzian ideas and intend to return to them when I want inspiration on a particular thought.

In particular I like Patton's exposition on "events" and how he ties these to sense and history. His application of Deleuze's use of colonization as a expressive metaphor is also interesting -- and in some sense serves as a defense against critics of Deleuze who would accuse Deleuze of being Euro-centric in his expression. Patton's inclusion of "What is Philosophy?" was also refreshing as this book is sometimes overlooked in favor of the rich conceptual precision of Deleuze's previous collaborations with Guattari. Patton's choice of examining Democracy was also illustrative of Deleuze's anti-transcendetal approach, although this can be critiqued further.

All in all, a good book to read on Deleuze, although it feels pretty selective. Overall I think Patton does a good job at grasping Deleuze's utopian aesthetic.