The more our daily life appears standardised, stereotyped and subject to an accelerated reproduction of objects of consumption, the more art must be injected into it in order to extract from it that little difference which plays simultaneously between other levels of repetition, and even in order to make the two extremes resonate - namely, the habitual series of consumption and the instinctual series of destruction and death. Art thereby connects the tableau of cruelty with that of stupidity, and discovers underneath consumption a schizophrenic clattering of the jaws, and underneath the most ignoble destructions of war, still more processes ofconsumption.
— Gilles Deleuze Difference and Repetition p. 293 (via hollmanlozano)
Hence the goal of schizoanalysis: to analyze the specific nature of the libidinal investments in the economic and political spheres, and thereby to show how, in the subject who desires, desire can be made to desire its own repression—whence the role of the death instinct in the circuit connecting desire to the social sphere. All this happens, not in ideology, but well beneath it.
Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia (1972), p. 105. (via literature-and-cats)
When someone asks ‘what’s the use of philosophy?’ the reply must be aggressive, since the question tries to be ironic and caustic. Philosophy does not serve the State or the Church, who have other concerns. It serves no established power. The use of philosophy is to sadden. A philosophy that saddens no one, that annoys no one, is not philosophy. It is useful for harming stupidity, for turning stupidity into something shameful. Is there any discipline apart from philosophy that sets out to criticise all mystification, whatever their source and aim, to expose all the fictions without which reactive forces would not prevail?…Finally, turning thought into something aggressive, active and affirmative. Creating free men, that is to say men who do not confuse the aims of culture with the benefit of the State, morality or religion….Who has an interest in all this but philosophy? Philosophy is at its most positive as a critique, as an enterprise of demystification.
— Deleuze, Nietzsche and Philosophy, 106.  (via becoming-vverevvolf)
[I]n Nietzsche, individualism is accompanied by a lively critique of the notions of “self” and “I.” For Nietzsche there is a kind of dissolution of the self. The reaction against oppressive structures is no longer done, for him, in the name of a “self” or an “I.” On the contrary, it is as though the “self” and the “I” were accomplices of those structures.
Individuals find a real name for themselves only through the hardest exercise in depersonalization, by opening themselves up to multiplicities everywhere within them, to the intensities running through them. A name [one’s own name, speaking for yourself in your own name] as the direct awareness of such intensive multiplicity is the opposite of the depersonalization effected by the history of philosophy; it’s depersonalization through love rather than subjection. What one says becomes from the depths of one’s ignorance, the depths of one’s own underdevelopment. One becomes a set of liberated singularities, words, names, fingernails, things, animals, little events.
— Gilles Deleuze, “Letter to a Harsh Critic” in Negotiations 1972-1990 (via veir)

(Source: givemeabody)

usvakorpi:

“The problem is no longer getting people to express themselves, but providing little gaps of solitude and silence in which they might eventually find something to say. Repressive forces don’t stop people from expressing themselves, but rather, force them to express themselves. What a relief to have nothing to say, the right to say nothing, because only then is there a chance of framing the rare, or ever rarer, the thing that might be worth saying.”

— Gilles Deleuze, “Mediators”

(Source: allisonburtch)

Every writer is a sellout. The only literature is that which places an explosive device in its package, fabricating a counterfeit currency, causing the super- ego and its form of expression to explode, as well as the market value of its form of content.
— Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari, Anti-Oedipus p. 146 (via post-makhno)
The truth is that sexuality is everywhere: in the way that a bureaucrat fondles his records, a judge administers justice, a businessman causes money to circulate; in the way the bourgeoisie fucks the proletariat; and so on. And there is no need to resort to metaphors, any more than for the libido to go by way of metamorphoses. Hitler got the fascists sexually aroused. Flags, nations, armies, banks get a lot of people aroused.

Gilles Deleuze & Félix Guattari, Anti-Oedipus 

(translation slightly altered by Alan D. Schrift for quotation in Nietzsche’s French Legacy: A Genealogy of Poststructuralism)

(Source: jevoussaluespinelli)

Academics’ lives are seldom interesting. They travel of course, but they travel by hot air, by taking part in things like conferences and discussions, by talking, endlessly talking. Intellectuals are wonderfully cultivated, they have views on everything. I’m not an intellectual, because I can’t supply views like that, I’ve got no stock of views to draw on. What I know, I know only from something I’m actually working on, and if I come back to something a few years later, I have to learn everything all over again. It’s really good not having any view or idea about this or that point. We don’t suffer these days from any lack of communication, but rather from all the forces making us say things when we’ve nothing much to say.
Gilles Deleuze, from On Philosophy (via litafficionado)

quesalid:

Il fondo dell’arte, in effetti, è una specie di gioia, ed è proprio questo il proposito dell’arte. Non ci può essere opera tragica perchè vi è necessariamente una gioia di creare: l’arte è per forza una liberazione che fa esplodere tutto, a cominciare dal tragico. Non c’è una creazione triste senza una vis comica. L’eroe tragico è allegro.

Gilles Deleuze - Il freddo e il crudele

(Source: philofobia)

Eternity is neither an indefinite du­ration nor something that begins after duration, but it coexists with duration, just as two parts of ourselves that differ in nature coexist, the part that involves the existence of the body and the part that expresses its essence.
— Gilles Deleuze, “Spinoza: Practical Philosophy” (via lovevoltaireusapart)