The Academy hansen

deterritorialization [wave 2]

Deterritorialization [Wave 2]
Deterritorialization [Wave 2]...................................................................................... 1 1NC Identitarian Comm nities.................................................................................2 !" !evinas................................................................................................................ # !" Comm nity.......................................................................................................... $ Alt %. Identities....................................................................................................... 1& Alt %. 'ecomin(...................................................................................................... 11 A2 )esem*lin(....................................................................................................... 1+ A2 ,erm -'ecomin(............................................................................................... 1/ A2 ,ity0%ym1athy0Identi2ication.............................................................................13 A2 4iller................................................................................................................. 15

,a(e 1 o2 16

The Academy hansen

deterritorialization [wave 2]

1NC Identitarian Communities

1. The white mans fa e looms over the 1!C ins ri"in# an identit$ over whi h other must as ri"e to "e "$ ontrastin# [#rou% e& luded] with those who the$ should ho%e to "e. The affirmatives toleran e is an a t of si#nifi ation' "$ "rin#in# the a"(e t into normal %oliti s the$ reate de#rees of varian e from the ma(orit$. These su"(e tifi ations reate violen e a#ainst those who do not fit within so iet$.
Deleuze and )uattari, a Professor at the Sorbonne and an Institutional Psychiatrist, 19*+ [Gilles and Felix, A Thousand Plateaus, P. 176-17 ! "he reason is si#$le. "he face is not a uni%ersal. It is not e%en that of the &hite #an' it is (hite )an hi#self, &ith his broad &hite chee*s and the blac* hole of his eyes. "he face is +hrist. "he face is the ty$ical ,uro$ean, &hat ,-ra Pound called the a%era.e sensual #an, in short, the ordinary e%eryday ,roto#aniac /nineteenthcentury $sychiatrists &ere ri.ht to say that eroto#ania, unli*e ny#$ho#ania, often re#ains $ure and chaste' this is because it o$erates throu.h the face and faciali-ation0. 1ot a uni%ersal, but fades totius universi. 2esus +hrist su$erstar3 he in%ented the faciali-ation of the entire body and s$read it e%ery&here /the Passion of 2oan of 4rc, in close-u$0. "hus the face is by nature an entirely s$ecific idea, &hich did not $reclude its ac5uirin. and exercisin. the #ost .eneral of functions3 the function of biuni%ocali-ation, or binari-ation. It has t&o as$ects3 the abstract #achine of faciality, insofar as it is co#$osed by a blac* hole6&hite &all syste#, functions in t&o &ays, one of &hich concerns the units or ele#ents, the other the choices. 7nder the first as$ect, the blac* hole acts as a central co#$uter, +hrist, the third eye that #o%es across the &all or the &hite screen ser%in. as .eneral surface of reference. 8e.ardless of the content one .i%es it, the #achine constitutes a facial unit, an ele#entary face in biuni%ocal relation &ith another3 it is a #an or a &o#an, a rich $erson or a $oor one, an adult or a child, a leader or a sub9ect, :an x or a y.: "he #o%e#ent of the blac* hole across the screen, the tra9ectory of the third eye o%er the surface of reference, constitutes so #any dichoto#ies or arborescences, li*e four-eye #achines #ade of ele#entary faces lin*ed to.ether t&o by t&o. "he face of a teacher and a student, father and son, &or*er and boss, co$ and citi-en, accused and 9ud.e /:the 9ud.e had a stern ex$ression, his eyes &ere hori-onless...:03 concrete indi%iduali-ed faces are $roduced and transfor#ed on the basis of these units, these co#binations of units;li*e the face of a rich child in &hich a #ilitary callin. is already discernible, that (est Point chin. <ou don=t so #uch ha%e a face as slide into one. 7nder the second as$ect, the abstract #achine of faciality assu#es a role of selecti%e res$onse, or choice3 .i%en a concrete face, the #achine 9ud.es &hether it $asses or not, &hether it .oes or not, on the basis of the ele#entary facial units. "his ti#e, the binary relation is of the :yes-no: ty$e. "he e#$ty eye or blac* hole absorbs or re9ects, li*e a half-dodderin. des$ot &ho can still .i%e a si.nal of ac5uiescence or refusal. "he face of a .i%en teacher is contorted by tics and bathed in an anxiety that #a*es it :no .o.: 4 defendant, a sub9ect, dis$lays an o%eraffected sub#ission that turns into insolence. >r so#eone is too $olite to be honest. 4 .i%en face is neither a #an=s nor a &o#an=s. >r it is neither a $oor $erson=s nor a rich $erson=s. Is it so#eone &ho lost his fortune? 4t e%ery #o#ent, the #achine re9ects faces that do not confor#, or see# sus$icious. @ut only at a .i%en le%el of choice. For it is necessary to $roduce successi%e di%er.ence-ty$es of de%iance for e%erythin. that eludes biuni%ocal relationshi$s, and to establish binary relations bet&een &hat is acce$ted on first choice and &hat is only tolerated on second, third choice, etc. "he &hite &all is al&ays ex$andin., and the blac* hole functions re$eatedly. "he teacher has .one #ad, but #adness is a face confor#in. to the nth choice /not the last, ho&e%er, since there are #ad faces that do not confor# to &hat one assu#es #adness should be0. 4 haA It=s not a #an and it=s not a &o#an, so it #ust be a trans%estite3 "he binary relation is bet&een the :no: of the first cate.ory and the :yes: of the follo&in. cate.ory, &hich under certain conditions #ay 9ust as easily #ar* a tolerance as indicate an ene#y to be #o&ed do&n at all costs. 4t any rate, you=%e been reco.ni-ed, the abstract #achine has you inscribed in its o%erall .rid. It is clear that in its ne& role as de%iance detector, the faciality #achine does not restrict itself to indi%idual cases but o$erates in 9ust as .eneral a fashion as it did in its first role, the co#$utation of nor#alities. If the face is in fact +hrist, in other &ords, your a%era.e ordinary (hite )an, then the first de%iances, the first di%er.encety$es, are racial3 yello& #an, blac* #an, #en in the second or third cate.ory. "hey are also inscribed on the &all, distributed by the hole. "hey #ust be +hristiani-ed, in other &ords, faciali-ed. ,uro$ean racis# as the &hite #an=s clai# has

,a(e 2 o2 16

The Academy hansen

deterritorialization [wave 2]

ne%er o$erated by exclusion, or by the desi.nation of so#eone as >ther3 it is instead in $ri#iti%e societies that the stran.er is .ras$ed as an :other.:1B 8acis# o$erates by the deter#ination of de.rees of de%iance in relation to the (hite-)an face, &hich endea%ors to inte.rate nonconfor#in. traits into increasin.ly eccentric and bac*&ard &a%es, so#eti#es toleratin. the# at .i%en $laces under .i%en conditions, in a .i%en .hetto, so#eti#es erasin. the# fro# the &all, &hich ne%er abides alterity /it=s a 2e&, it=s an 4rab, it=s a 1e.ro, it=s a lunatic . . .0. Fro# the %ie&$oint of racis#, there is no exterior, there are no $eo$le on the outside. "here are only $eo$le &ho should be li*e us and &hose cri#e it is not to be. "he di%idin. line is not bet&een inside and outside but rather is internal to si#ultaneous si.nifyin. chains and successi%e sub9ecti%e choices. 8acis# ne%er detects the $articles of the other' it $ro$a.ates &a%es of sa#eness until those &ho resist identification ha%e been &i$ed out /or those &ho only allo& the#sel%es to be identified at a .i%en de.ree of di%er.ence0. Its cruelty is e5ualed only by its inco#$etence and naC%etD.

B. ! e%tan e within ommunities is %redi ated on adheren e to the norms %res ri"ed "$ stati su"(e tivities. The !,, arves out a su"(e tive s%a e for [#rou%]- redu in# them to "odies ounted as mem"ers of so iet$. This num"erin# is a tool to #ain master$ over the ounted.
)oh, Eisitin. Fello& at Far%ard 7ni%ersity and 8esearch Fello& at the 1ational 7ni%ersity of Sin.a$ore, BG +. [Ir%in., H"he Iuestion of +o##unity in Jeleu-e and Guattari /I03 4nti-+o##unity,K symplok , 1L.1-B, ,lectronic! 1o&, if co##unities beco#e s&e$t u$ by the $ro9ection and $ro9ectile of the no#adic &ar #achine, it is because they ha%e beco#e State-li*e in their outloo*. +o##unities ha%e beco#e o%ercodified by their lin.uistic idio#s, custo#s, econo#ic $ractices, $olitical inclinations, etc. )e#bershi$ into the co##unity is $redicated only by the *no&led.e, acce$tance, obser%ance, adherence, and co##unication of these codes. +o##unity has ta*en on a $olitics and an econo#y, and it has co#e to si.nify a circuitous flo&. ,%erythin. has to circle bac* onto itself. ,%erythin. is rooted onto a closed arborescent structure. 4nd e%erythin. has to be or.ani-ed. ,%ery face of e%ery body &ithin the co##unity beco#es reduced to a si.nifyin. articulation of the co##unity, beco#es sub9ected to a totali-in. re$resentation only of the co##unity. In other &ords, the face beco#es an o%er-conscious in%est#ent of co##unity. 4ccordin. to Jeleu-e and Guattari, the body in such an econo#y of co##unity beco#es reduced to a #ere deni.ratin. faciality. 4nd faciality is that $rocess in &hich the face is reduced to be a site of si.ns $ointin. to&ards &hat it in%ests in or &hat in%ests in it, and &hereby the body as the carto.ra$hy of si.ns of sin.ularity is no lon.er re.arded at. 4nd &ith this $rocess of faciality, the o$eration of nu#berin. be.ins. ,%erythin. counts in this s$ace. 1ot 9ust bodies count because of the nu#ber that their faces &ill add to the $ro.ressi%e faMade of the co##unity, but e%en ethics be.ins to be 5uantitati%ely #easured. I cite the exa#$le @au#an uses in elucidatin. so#e of the #yths of co##unity. (ithin co##unities that are #ytholo.i-ed by us, &e ta*e it as natural or .i%en that once &e ha%e hel$ed so#eone in the co##unity, Hour ri.ht, $urely and si#$ly, is to ex$ect that the hel$ &e need &ill be forthco#in.K /B0. ,%en the friend &ill be counted. It &ill be a #atter of #y friend, so#eone I can count /on0 to add 5uantitati%e #easure to the co##unity. It &ill not be that estran.in. friend, the friend that is the other, the friend that brin.s to the structure of co##unity a difference or e%en ri%alry, so that co##unity is ne%er a ri.id or closed structure. N 4t this $oint, &e are re#inded by Jeleu-e and Guattari that Hthe nu#ber has al&ays ser%ed to .ain #astery o%er #atter, to control its %ariations and #o%e#ents, in other &ords, to sub#it the# to the s$atiote#$oral fra#e&or* of the StateK /19 7, N 90. >ne is a$$roachin. a s6State of co##unity &hen e%erythin. counts.

/. The stan e of the 1!C is $ou are either with us or a#ainst us. 0$ allowin# ommunit$ ountin#- the$ le#itimize #eno idal "inar$ relationshi%s one ommunit$ a#ainst another. The 1ther side is alwa$s threatened with e&tin tion- and [the #rou%] fails to adhere to our e&%e tations- the$re annihilated to %reserve ontinuit$.
2am"ert, Professor of ,n.lish at the 7ni%ersity of Syracuse, BG+3 [Gre.., H4.ainst 8eli.ion /(ithout H8eli.ionK03 4 1e& 8ationalist 8e$ly to 2ohn J. +a$utoOs On Religion,K Journal for Cultural and Religious Theory, %ol. P no. B! (hat #ust ha%e terrified (ri.ht and #oti%ated hi# to res$ond &ith such seriousness to Sil*oOs anecdote about the death of their $et rooster &as $robably contained in her last re#ar*3 H"here are no li#its to our lo%e.K I &ill #odify this $hrase in order to read it the &ay (ri.ht had #ost li*ely understood it3 H"here are no li#its to our

,a(e 3 o2 16

The Academy hansen

deterritorialization [wave 2]

unconscious de#and for the lo%e of another. 1othin. and no-one it see#s, fro# an ato# all the &ay to a God, can esca$e this insane de#and.K In #odern urban societies, in $articular, the different ex$ressions of this de#and are lin*ed to the social $roduction of a Hnon-*no&led.eK that daily threatens the indi%idual identity on all sides and can be inferred fro# the #ost co##on and e%eryday occurrences of anony#ity, $ersonal or collecti%e for.ettin., en#ity, denial, o$$ression, and estran.e#ent /or social alienation0. "hese are the i#$licate for#s of an unconscious order that conditions the #ost 5uotidian relationshi$s, #ar*in. a social $resent for the indi%idual &hose identity is bordered on each side by a threat of extinction. H<ou are either for us,K a certain .rou$, class, or social cell #i.ht say, Hor you donOt exist. H<ou are nothin. for us and, conse5uently, no-one.K Silently and unre#ar*ably, this Either Or constitutes &hat I &ould call Hthe social $resent tense,K and e%en re$resents a do#inant factor of sociali-ation, one &hich can be found at the heart of e%ery extended fa#ily, e%ery $rofessional or.ani-ation, e%ery &or*$lace, coc*tail $arty' e%ery school or uni%ersity, or.ani-ed reli.ion, ethnic or $olitical co##unity. "he %ery existence of the #odern indi%idual, an existence &hich can only be established fro# the stand$oint of the reco.nition by others, is sha$ed by a continuous force of nihilation that effecti%ely decides, in the case of each $articular, the 5uestion Hto be, or not to beK in the #ost decisi%e #anner. In its extre#e ex$ressions, this force of nihilation #ust be brou.ht into contact &ith the #ore collecti%e ex$ressions of social hatred /or en#ity0, $olitical re$ression, and e%en &ith a certain .enocidal desire that lies at the basis of #ost historical societies. Ironically, &e ha%e e%en co#e to disco%er that often the %ery $rinci$le that H.i%esK the indi%idual her identity and binds this identity to a collecti%e identification /one &hich is 9ust as #uch for the .rou$ as it is for the indi%idual0, is the sa#e $rinci$le that also underlies the stran.e and $aradoxical lo.ic that #a*es the hatred of stran.ers and the $ersecution of selected HothersK &ith the threat of extinction and non-identity an ine%itable conse5uence.

3. ! e%tan e into the ommunit$ is a tool of ontrol. Chan#e is al ulated in relation to the rest of the ommunit$ 4how lose to affluent are we56- and "$ investin# the ver$ so iet$ that o%%resses them- [the #rou%] "e ome the ommunities standin# arm$read$ to destro$ an$ trans#ression a#ainst their hallowed savior.
Deleuze and )uattari, a Professor at the Sorbonne and an Institutional Psychiatrist, 1972 [Gilles and Felix, Anti! Oedipus, P. NLP-NL6! (e ha%e seen ho& the ca$italist #achine constituted a syste# of i##anence bordered by a .reat #utant flo&, non$ossessi%e and non$ossessed, flo&in. o%er the full body of ca$ital and for#in. an absurd $o&er. ,%eryone in his class and his $erson recei%es so#ethin. fro# this $o&er, or is excluded fro# it, insofar as the .reat flo& is con%erted into inco#es, inco#es of &a.es or of enter$rises that define ai#s or s$heres of interest, selections, detach#ents, and $ortions. @ut the in%est#ent of the flo& itself and its axio#atic, &hich to be sure re5uires no $recise *no&led.e of $olitical econo#y, is the business of the unconscious libido, inas#uch as it is $resu$$osed by the ai#s. (e see the #ost disad%anta.ed, the #ost excluded #e#bers of society in%est &ith $assion the syste# that o$$resses the#, and &here they al&ays find an interest, since it is here that they search for and #easure it. Interest al&ays co#es after. 4nti$roduction effuses in the syste#3 anti$roduction is lo%ed for itself, as is the &ay in &hich desire re$resses itself in the .reat ca$italist a..re.ate. 8e$ressin. desire, not only for others but in oneself, bein. the co$ for others and for oneself-that is &hat arouses, and it is not ideolo.y, it is econo#y. +a$italis# .arners and $ossesses the force of the ai# and the interest "po#er$, but it feels a disinterested lo%e for the absurd and non$ossessed force of the #achine. >h, to be sure, it is not for hi#self or his children that the ca$italist &or*s, but for the i##ortality of the syste#. 4 %iolence &ithout $ur$ose, a 9oy, a $ure 9oy in feelin. oneself a &heel in the #achine, tra%ersed by flo&s, bro*en by schi--es. Placin. oneself in a $osition &here one is thus tra%ersed, bro*en, fuc*ed by the socius, loo*in. for the ri.ht $lace &here, accordin. to the ai#s and the interests assi.ned to us, one feels so#ethin. #o%in. that has neither an interest nor a $ur$ose. 4 sort of art for art=s sa*e in the libido, a taste for a 9ob &ell done, each one in his o&n $lace, the ban*er, the co$, the soldier, the technocrat, the bureaucrat, and &hy not the &or*er, the trade-unionist. Jesire is a.a$e.

,a(e 4 o2 16

The Academy hansen

deterritorialization [wave 2]

8. The new in(un tion is to "e %rodu tive. Their toleran e is "ut a method of e&tra tin# value from a on e e& luded #rou% their te hno9e onomi fo us are meant to %rodu e the most "an# for their "u :. ;umanit$ is swe%t u% in the swirl of e&%loitive %assions- a%%earin# free- "ut trul$ insidious nonetheless.
)uattari, $racticin. $sychoanalyst at Qa @orde clinic, 19*7 [FDlix, H8e.i#es, Path&ays, Sub9ects,K %oft %u&'ersions, edited by Syl%Rre Qotrin.er, P. 1B1-1BN! "he second co#$onent of ca$italist sub9ecti%ity be.ins effecti%ely in the 1 th century. It is #ar*ed abo%e all by a .ro&in. dise5uilibriu# in the relations of hu#an bein. to tool. Fu#an bein.s also &itnessed the disa$$earance and eradication of social territorialities that, until then, &ere thou.ht to be $er#anent and inalienable. "heir land#ar*s of social and $hysical cor$oreality &ere $rofoundly sha*en. "he uni%erse of reference for the ne& syste# of .enerali-ed exchan.e &as no lon.er territorial se.#entarity, but rather ca$ital as a #ode of se#iotic reterritoriali-ation of hu#an acti%ities and structures u$rooted by #achinic $rocesses. >nce, a real Jes$ot or i#a.inary God ser%ed as the o$erational *eystone for the local reco#$osition of actual territories. 1o&, thou.h, that role &ould be $layed by sy#bolic ca$itali-ation of abstract %alues of $o&er bearin. on econo#ic and technolo.ical #odes of *no&led.e indexed to ne&ly deterritoriali-ed social classes, and creatin. a .eneral e5ui%alence bet&een all %alori-ations of .oods and hu#an acti%ities. 4 syste# of this sort cannot $reser%e its historical consistency &ithout resortin. to a *ind of endless headlon. race, &ith a constant rene.otiation of the sta*es. "he ne& Hca$italist $assionK &ould s&ee$ u$ e%erythin. in its $ath, in $articular the cultures and territorialities that had succeeded to one de.ree or another in esca$in. the +hristian stea#roller. "he $rinci$al consistency factors of this co#$onent are the follo&in.3 First3 "he .eneral s$read of the $rinted text into all as$ects of social and cultural life, correlated &ith a certain &ea*enin. of the $erfor#ati%e force of direct oral co##unication' by the sa#e to*en, ca$abilities of accu#ulatin. and $rocessin. *no&led.e are .reatly ex$anded. Second3 "he $ri#acy of stea#-$o&ered #achines and steel, &hich #ulti$lied the $o&er of #achinic %ectors to $ro$a.ate the#sel%es on land, sea and air, and across e%ery technolo.ical, econo#ic and urban s$ace. "hird3 "he #ani$ulation of ti#e, &hich is e#$tied of its natural rhyth#s by chrono#etric #achines leadin. to a "aylorist rationali-ation of labor $o&er' techni5ues of econo#ic se#ioti-ation, for exa#$le, in%ol%in. credit #oney, &hich i#$ly a .eneral %irtuali-ation of ca$acities for hu#an initiati%e and a $redicti%e calculus bearin. on do#ains of inno%ation; chec*s &ritten on the future;all of &hich #a*es $ossible an unli#ited ex$ansion of the i#$eriu# of #ar*et econo#ies. Fourth3 "he biolo.ical re%olutions, be.innin. &ith PasteurOs disco%eries, that ha%e lin*ed the future of li%in. s$ecies e%er #ore closely to the de%elo$#ent bioche#ical industries. Fu#an bein.s find the#sel%es rele.ated to a $osition of 5uasi-$arasitic ad9acency to the #achinic $hyla. ,ach of their or.ans and social relations are 5uite si#$ly re$atterned in order to be reallocated, o%ercoded in accordance &ith the .lobal re5uire#ents of the syste# /"he #ost .ri$$in. and $ro$hetic re$resentations of these bodily rearran.in.s are found in the &or* of Qeonardo da Einci, @rue.hel and es$ecially 4rci#boldo.0 "he $aradox of this functionali-ation of hu#an or.ans and faculties and its attendant re.i#e of .eneral e5ui%alence bet&een syste#s of %alue is that, e%en as it stubbornly continues to in%o*e uni%ersali-in. $ers$ecti%es, all it e%er #ana.es to do historically is fold bac* on itself, yieldin. reterritoriali-ations of nationalist, classist, cor$oratist, racist and nationalist *ind. @ecause of this, it inexorably returns to the #ost conser%ati%e, at ti#es caricatured, $aths6%oices. "he Hs$irit of enli.hten#ent,K &hich #ar*ed the ad%ent of this second fi.ure of ca$italist sub9ecti%ity, is necessarily acco#$anied by an utterly ho$eless fetishi-ation of $rofit ;a s$ecifically bour.eois libidinal $o&er for#ula. "hat for#ula distanced itself fro# the old e#ble#atic syste#s of control o%er territories, $eo$le and .oods by e#$loyin. #ore deterritoriali-ed #ediations;only to secrete the #ost obtuse, asocial and infantili-in. of sub9ecti%e .round&or*s. Jes$ite the a$$earance of freedo# of thou.ht that the ne& ca$italist #onotheis# is so fond of affectin., it has al&ays $resu$$osed an archaistic, irrational .ri$ on unconscious sub9ecti%ity, #ost notably throu.h hy$erindi%iduated a$$aratuses of res$onsibility, and .uilt-$roduction, &hich, carried to a fe%er $itch, lead to co#$ulsi%e self- $unish#ent and #orbid cults of bla#e;$erfectly re$ertoried in Saf*aOs uni%erse.

.. 1ur <riti: is an anal$sis of the stati identities onstru ted within the 1!C. =&%lorin# the ,a ialities the$ onstru t allows us to find wa$s to es a%e. 1ur destin$ is to
,a(e 5 o2 16

The Academy hansen

deterritorialization [wave 2]

"e ome9im%er e%ti"le and es a%e the fas ism of the fa e> instead of identif$in# with it- we should a tivel$ wa#e war a#ainst it.
Deleuze and )uattari, a Professor at the Sorbonne and an Institutional Psychiatrist, 19*+ [Gilles and Felix, A Thousand Plateaus, P. 17G! (e can no& $ro$ose the follo&in. distinction3 the face is $art of a surface-holes, holey surface, syste#. "his syste# should under no circu#stances be confused &ith the %olu#e-ca%ity syste# $ro$er to the /$ro$rioce$ti%e0 body. "he head is included in the body, but the face is not. "he face is a surface3 facial traits, lines, &rin*les' lon. face, s5uare face, trian.ular face' the face is a #a$, e%en &hen it is a$$lied to and &ra$s a %olu#e, e%en &hen it surrounds and borders ca%ities that are no& no #ore than holes. "he head, e%en the hu#an head, is not necessarily a face. "he face is $roduced only &hen the head ceases to be a $art of the body, &hen it ceases to be coded by the body, &hen it ceases to ha%e a #ultidi#ensional, $oly%ocal cor$oreal code; &hen the body, head included, has been decoded and has to be overcoded by so#ethin. &e shall call the Face. "his a#ounts to sayin. that the head, all the %olu#e-ca%ity ele#ents of the head, ha%e to be faciali-ed. (hat acco#$lishes this is the screen &ith holes, the &hite &all6blac* hole, the abstract #achine $roducin. faciality. @ut the o$eration does not end there3 if the head and its ele#ents are faciali-ed, the entire body also can be faciali-ed, co#es to be faciali-ed as $art of an ine%itable $rocess. (hen the #outh and nose, but first the eyes, beco#e a holey surface, all the other %olu#es and ca%ities of the body follo&. 4n o$eration &orthy of Joctor )oreau3 horrible and #a.nificent. Fand, breast, sto#ach, $enis and %a.ina, thi.h, le. and foot, all co#e to be faciali-ed. Fetishis#, eroto#ania, etc., are inse$arable fro# these $rocesses of faciali-ation. It is not at all a 5uestion of ta*in. a $art of the body and #a*in. it resemble a face, or #a*in. a drea#-face dance in a cloud. 1o anthro$o#or$his# here. Faciali-ation o$erates not by rese#blance but by an order of reasons. It is a #uch #ore unconscious and #achinic o$eration that dra&s the entire body across the holey surface, and in &hich the role of the face is not as a #odel or i#a.e, but as an o%ercodin. of all of the decoded $arts. ,%erythin. re#ains sexual' there is no subli#ation, but there are ne& coordinates. It is $recisely because the face de$ends on an abstract #achine that it is not content to co%er the head, but touches all other $arts of the body, and e%en, if necessary, other ob9ects &ithout rese#blance. "he 5uestion then beco#es &hat circu#stances tri..er the #achine that $roduces the face and faciali-ation. 4lthou.h the head, e%en the hu#an head, is not necessarily a face, the face is $roduced in hu#anity. @ut it is $roduced by a necessity that does not a$$ly to hu#an bein.s :in .eneral.: "he face is not ani#al, but neither is it hu#an in .eneral' there is e%en so#ethin. absolutely inhu#an about the face. It &ould be an error to $roceed as thou.h the face beca#e inhu#an only beyond a certain threshold3 close u$, extre#e #a.nification, recondite ex$ression, etc. "he inhu#an in hu#an bein.s3 that is &hat the face is fro# the start. It is by nature a closeu$, &ith its inani#ate &hite surfaces, its shinin. blac* holes, its e#$tiness and boredo#. @un*er-face. "o the $oint that if hu#an bein.s ha%e a destiny, it is rather to esca$e the face, to dis#antle the face and faciali-ations, to beco#e i#$erce$tible, to beco#e clandestine, not by returnin. to ani#ality, nor e%en by returnin. to the head, but by 5uite s$iritual and s$ecial beco#in.s-ani#al, by stran.e true beco#in.s that .et $ast the &all and .et out of the blac* holes, that make faciality traits the#sel%es finally elude the or.ani-ation of the face;frec*les dashin. to&ard the hori-on, hair carried off by the &ind, eyes you tra%erse instead of seein. yourself in or .a-in. into in those .lu# face-to-face encounters bet&een si.nifyin. sub9ecti%ities. :I no lon.er loo* into the eyes of the &o#an I hold in #y ar#s but I s&i# throu.h, head and ar#s and le.s, and I see that behind the soc*ets of the eyes there is a re.ion unex$lored, the &orld of futurity, and here there is no lo.ic &hatsoe%er. . . . I ha%e bro*en the &all. . .. )y eyes are useless, for they render bac* only the i#a.e of the *no&n. )y &hole body #ust beco#e a constant bea# of li.ht, #o%in. &ith an e%er .reater ra$idity, ne%er arrested, ne%er loo*in. bac*, ne%er d&indlin..... Therefore I close my ears, my eyes, my mouth.'''P @&>. <es, the face has a .reat future, but only if it is destroyed, dis#antled. >n the road to the asi.nifyin. and asub9ecti%e. @ut so far &e ha%e ex$lained nothin. of &hat &e sense.

7. Instead of tr$in# to let the a"(e t "e one with the rest of so iet$- we should follow the o%%osite %ath %ure differen e in so iet$. 0$ "e omin#9im%er e%ti"le we "e ome indistin#uisha"le from our former selves and "rin# into reation new worlds of %ossi"ilit$.
Deleuze and )uattari, a Professor at the Sorbonne and an Institutional Psychiatrist, 19*+ [Gilles and Felix, A Thousand Plateaus, P. B79-B G!

,a(e 6 o2 16

The Academy hansen

deterritorialization [wave 2]

4 first res$onse &ould be3 to be li*e e%erybody else. "hat is &hat Sier*e.aard relates in his story about the :*ni.ht of the faith,: the #an of beco#in.3 to loo* at hi#, one &ould notice nothin., a bour.eois, nothin. but a bour.eois. "hat is ho& Fit-.erald li%ed3 after a real ru$ture, one succeeds . . . in bein. 9ust li*e e%erybody else. "o .o unnoticed is by no #eans easy. "o be a stran.er, e%en to one=s door#an or nei.hbors. If it is so difficult to be :li*e: e%erybody else, it is because it is an affair of beco#in.. 1ot e%erybody beco#es e%erybody [and e%erythin.3 tout le #onde;"rans.!, #a*es a beco#in. of e%erybody6e%erythin.. "his re5uires #uch asceticis#, #uch sobriety, #uch creati%e in%olution3 an ,n.lish ele.ance, an ,n.lish fabric, blend in &ith the &alls, eli#inate the too-$ercei%ed, the too #uch- to-be-$ercei%ed. :,li#inate all that is &aste, death, and su$erfluity,: co#$laint and .rie%ance, unsatisfied desire, defense or $leadin., e%erythin. that roots each of us /e%erybody0 in oursel%es, in our #olarity. For e%erybody6e%erythin. is the #olar a..re.ate, but beco#in. e%erybody6 e%erythin. is another affair, one that brin.s into $lay the cos#os &ith its #olecular co#$onents. @eco#in. e%erybody6e%erythin. /tout le #onde0 is to &orld /faire #onde0, to #a*e a &orld /faire un #onde0. @y $rocess of eli#ination, one is no lon.er anythin. #ore than an abstract line, or a $iece in a $u--le that is itself abstract. It is by con9u.atin., by continuin. &ith other lines, other $ieces, that one #a*es a &orld that can o%erlay the first one, li*e a trans$arency. 4ni#al ele.ance, the ca#oufla.e fish, the clandestine3 this fish is crisscrossed by abstract lines that rese#ble nothin., that do not e%en follo& its or.anic di%isions' but thus disor.ani-ed, disarticulated, it &orlds &ith the lines of a roc*, sand, and $lants, beco#in. i#$erce$tible. "he fish is li*e the +hinese $oet3 not i#itati%e or structural, but cos#ic. Francois +hen. sho&s that $oets do not $ursue rese#blance, any #ore than they calculate :.eo#etric $ro$ortions.: "hey retain, extract only the essential lines and #o%e#ents of nature' they $roceed only by continued or su$er$osed :traits,: or stro*es. 6N It is in this sense that beco#in.-e%erybody6e%erythin., #a*in. the &orld a beco#in., is to &orld, to #a*e a &orld or &orlds, in other &ords, to find one=s $roxi#ities and -ones of indiscernibility. "he +os#os as an abstract #achine, and each &orld as an asse#bla.e effectuatin. it. If one reduces oneself to one or se%eral abstract lines that &ill $rolon. itself in and con9u.ate &ith others, $roducin. i##ediately, directly a &orld in &hich it is the &orld that beco#es, then one beco#es-e%erybody6e%erythin.. Serouac=s drea#, and already Eir.inia (oolf s, &as for the &ritin. to be li*e the line of a +hinese $oe#-dra&in.. She says that it is necessary to :saturate e%ery ato#,: and to do that it is necessary to eli#inate, to eli#inate all that is rese#blance and analo.y, but also :to $ut e%erythin. into it:3 eli#inate e%erythin. that exceeds the #o#ent, but $ut in e%erythin. that it includes;and the #o#ent is not the instantaneous, it is the haecceity into &hich one sli$s and that sli$s into other haecceities by trans$arency.6L "o be $resent at the da&n of the &orld. Such is the lin* bet&een i#$erce$tibility, indiscernibility, and i#$ersonality;the three %irtues. "o reduce oneself to an abstract line, a trait, in order to find one=s -one of indiscernibility &ith other traits, and in this &ay enter the haecceity and i#$ersonality of the creator. >ne is then li*e .rass3 one has #ade the &orld, e%erybody6e%erythin., into a beco#in., because one has #ade a necessarily co##unicatin. &orld, because one has su$$ressed in oneself e%erythin. that $re%ents us fro# sli$$in. bet&een thin.s and .ro&in. in the #idst of thin.s. >ne has co#bined :e%erythin.: /le :tout:03 the indefinite article, the infiniti%e-beco#in., and the $ro$er na#e to &hich one is reduced. Saturate, eli#inate, $ut e%erythin. in.

*. 1ur dis ourse in this round is enou#h. The alternative is a dire t s%ee h- free from the %oli e lan#ua#es onstraints. The lan#ua#e of desire moves %eo%le to a tion.
)uattari, $racticin. $sychoanalyst at Qa @orde clinic, 19?2 [FDlix, HPo$ular Free 8adio,K %oft %u&'ersions, edited by Syl%Rre Qotrin.er, P. 76-77! In dra&in. u$ the +ahiers de dolDances in 17 9, the s$o*es#en of the "hird ,state &ere literally ha%in. to in%ent a ne& #ediu# of ex$ression, a ne& lan.ua.e. "oday, the Fourth (orld is also in search of #inor lan.ua.es to brin. $roble#s to li.ht that, in reality, concern society as a &hole. It is in this context of ex$eri#entin. &ith a ne& ty$e of direct de#ocracy that the 5uestion of free radio is inscribed. Jirect s$eech, li%in. s$eech, full of confidence, but also hesitation, contradiction, indeed e%en absurdity, is char.ed &ith desire. 4nd it is al&ays this as$ect of desire that s$o*es#en, co##entators, and bureaucrats of e%ery sta#$ tend to reduce, to filter. "he lan.ua.e of official #edia is $atterned on the $olice lan.ua.es of the #ana.erial #ilieu and the uni%ersity' it all .ets bac* to a funda#ental s$lit bet&een sayin. and doin. accordin. to &hich only those &ho are #asters of a licit s$eech ha%e the ri.ht to act. Qan.ua.es of desire, on the other hand, in%ent ne& #eans and ha%e an une5ui%ocal tendency to lead strai.ht to action' they be.in by Htouchin.,K by $ro%o*in. lau.hter, by #o%in. $eo$le, and then they #a*e one &ant to H#o%e out,K to&ard those &ho s$ea* and to&ard those sta*es of concern to the#.

,a(e 7 o2 16

The Academy hansen

deterritorialization [wave 2]

2& 2evinas
The !ffirmatives infinite o"li#ation to the 1ther su"(e tifies us in relation to those who we see: to hel%.
0runs, (illia# P. and Fa-el @. (hite Professor of Qiterature at the 7ni%ersity of 1otre Ja#e, BG+7 [Gerald Q., H@eco#in.-4ni#al /So#e Si#$le (ays0,K (e# )iterary *istory, N .L, ,lectronic! )ean&hile @acon re#inds us that s&ellin. is $ro$er to the flesh, as in his Study for "hree Feads /196B0, and $articularly his self-$ortraits &here his o&n face loses definition in the #anner of a $u##eled $ri-e-fi.hter. Jeleu-e=s interest in this defor#ation or disa$$earance of the face can be traced bac* to the cha$ter on :Faciality: in 4 "housand Plateaus in &hich Jeleu-e and Guattari $ro$ose &hat &e #i.ht thin* of as a distincti%ely anti-Qe%inasian theory of the face. (hereas for ,##anuel QD%inas the face-to-face relation, #y ex$osure to the face of the other, is &here #y bein.-hu#an is enacted in the for# of res$onsibility for the other, for Jeleu-e and Guattari :the face is a horror story: /"P 16 0. :"he face is not an en%elo$e exterior to the $erson &ho s$ea*s, thin*s, or feels: /"P 1670. It is so#ethin. laid on fro# the outside that allo&s #e to $ass into hu#an society but only &ithin certain narro& corridors defined by the faciality of #y face. "he &hite ,uro$ean #ale face defines the a$ex fro# &hich hu#anity declines by de.rees into the faces of &o#en, children, non&esterners, subalterns, abori.ines, ho#inids, tro.lodytes, chi#$an-ees, $ets, bats, flies. B9 I#a.ine ha%in. a face no one feels obli.ed to /or can bear to0 re.ard;no eye contact for you' $erha$s one then resorts to sur.ery of the *ind that >rlan $arodies, es$ecially &hen she has her face transfor#ed into .rotes5ue #as*s. In any case, the face is a re.i#e of sociali-ation to be esca$ed3 "he face is not ani#al, but neither is it hu#an in .eneral' there is e%en so#ethin. absolutely inhu#an about the face. It &ould be an error to $roceed as thou.h the face beca#e inhu#an only beyond a certain threshold3 closeu$, extre#e #a.nification, recondite ex$ression, etc. "he inhu#an in hu#an bein.s3 that is &hat the face is [#y e#$hases!. It is by nature a close-u$, &ith its ani#ate &hite surfaces, its shinin. blac* holes, its e#$tiness and boredo#. @un*er-face. "o the $oint that if hu#an bein.s ha%e a destiny, it is rather to esca$e the face, to dis#antle the face and faciali-ations, to beco#e i#$erce$tible, to beco#e [,nd Pa.e 71B! clandestine, not by returnin. to ani#ality, nor e%en by returnin. to the head, but by 5uite s$iritual and s$ecial beco#in.-ani#al, by stran.e true beco#in.s that .et $ast the &all and .et out of the blac* holes that #a*e faciality traits the#sel%es finally elude the or.ani-ation of the face;frec*les dashin. to&ard the hori-on, hair carried off by the &ind, eyes you tra%erse instead of seein. yourself in or .a-in. in those .lu# face-to-face encounters bet&een si.nifyin. sub9ecti%ities. /"P 17GT710

,a(e 8 o2 16

The Academy hansen

deterritorialization [wave 2]

2& Communit$
4cce$tance &ithin co##unities de$ends on adherence to nor#s that deter#ine and nu#ber the indi%iduals &ithin the co##unity. ,%en ethics are counted.
)oh, Eisitin. Fello& at Far%ard 7ni%ersity and 8esearch Fello& at the 1ational 7ni%ersity of Sin.a$ore, BG +. [Ir%in., H"he Iuestion of +o##unity in Jeleu-e and Guattari /I03 4nti-+o##unity,K symplok , 1L.1-B, ,lectronic! 1o&, if co##unities beco#e s&e$t u$ by the $ro9ection and $ro9ectile of the no#adic &ar #achine, it is because they ha%e beco#e State-li*e in their outloo*. +o##unities ha%e beco#e o%ercodified by their lin.uistic idio#s, custo#s, econo#ic $ractices, $olitical inclinations, etc. )e#bershi$ into the co##unity is $redicated only by the *no&led.e, acce$tance, obser%ance, adherence, and co##unication of these codes. +o##unity has ta*en on a $olitics and an econo#y, and it has co#e to si.nify a circuitous flo&. ,%erythin. has to circle bac* onto itself. ,%erythin. is rooted onto a closed arborescent structure. 4nd e%erythin. has to be or.ani-ed. ,%ery face of e%ery body &ithin the co##unity beco#es reduced to a si.nifyin. articulation of the co##unity, beco#es sub9ected to a totali-in. re$resentation only of the co##unity. In other &ords, the face beco#es an o%er-conscious in%est#ent of co##unity. 4ccordin. to Jeleu-e and Guattari, the body in such an econo#y of co##unity beco#es reduced to a #ere deni.ratin. faciality. 4nd faciality is that $rocess in &hich the face is reduced to be a site of si.ns $ointin. to&ards &hat it in%ests in or &hat in%ests in it, and &hereby the body as the carto.ra$hy of si.ns of sin.ularity is no lon.er re.arded at. 4nd &ith this $rocess of faciality, the o$eration of nu#berin. be.ins. ,%erythin. counts in this s$ace. 1ot 9ust bodies count because of the nu#ber that their faces &ill add to the $ro.ressi%e faMade of the co##unity, but e%en ethics be.ins to be 5uantitati%ely #easured. I cite the exa#$le @au#an uses in elucidatin. so#e of the #yths of co##unity. (ithin co##unities that are #ytholo.i-ed by us, &e ta*e it as natural or .i%en that once &e ha%e hel$ed so#eone in the co##unity, Hour ri.ht, $urely and si#$ly, is to ex$ect that the hel$ &e need &ill be forthco#in.K /B0. ,%en the friend &ill be counted. It &ill be a #atter of #y friend, so#eone I can count /on0 to add 5uantitati%e #easure to the co##unity. It &ill not be that estran.in. friend, the friend that is the other, the friend that brin.s to the structure of co##unity a difference or e%en ri%alry, so that co##unity is ne%er a ri.id or closed structure. N 4t this $oint, &e are re#inded by Jeleu-e and Guattari that Hthe nu#ber has al&ays ser%ed to .ain #astery o%er #atter, to control its %ariations and #o%e#ents, in other &ords, to sub#it the# to the s$atiote#$oral fra#e&or* of the StateK /19 7, N 90. >ne is a$$roachin. a s6State of co##unity &hen e%erythin. counts.

,a(e 9 o2 16

The Academy hansen

deterritorialization [wave 2]

!lt @. Identities
Chan#e mandates a shift from traditional identities.
)uattari, $racticin. $sychoanalyst at Qa @orde clinic, 19?. [FDlix, H"o Fa%e Jone &ith the )assacre of the @ody,K %oft %u&'ersions, edited by Syl%Rre Qotrin.er, P. NB-NN! "his desire for a funda#ental liberation, if it is to be a truly re%olutionary action, re5uires that &e #o%e beyond the li#its of our H$erson,K that &e o%erturn the #otion of the Hindi%idual,K that &e transcend our sedentary sel%es, our Hnor#al social identities,K in order to tra%el the boundary-less territory of the body, in order to li%e in the flux of desires that lies beyond sexuality, beyond the territory and the re$ertories of nor#ality. So it is that so#e of us ha%e felt the %ital need to act as a .rou$ in liberatin. oursel%es fro# those forces that ha%e crushed and controlled desire in each one of us. ,%erythin. that &e ha%e ex$erienced on the le%el of $ersonal, inti#ate life &e ha%e tried to a$$roach, ex$lore, and li%e collecti%ely. (e &ant to brea* do&n the concrete &all, erected by the do#inant social or.ani-ation, that se$arates bein. fro# a$$earance, the s$o*en fro# the uns$o*en, the $ri%ate fro# the social. "o.ether, &e ha%e be.un to ex$lore all the &or*in.s of our attractions, re$ulsions, our resistances, our or.as#s, the uni%erse of our re$resentations, our fetishes, our obsessions, our $hobias. "he Hunconfessable secretK has beco#e for us a #atter for reflection, $ublic discussion, and $olitical action; &here $olitics is ta*en as the social #anifestation of the irre$ressible as$irations of the Hli%in. bein..K (e ha%e decided to brea* the intolerable seal of secrecy &hich the $o&er structure has $laced on the reality of sensual, sexual, and affecti%e $ractices' thus &e &ill brea* the $o&er structureOs ability to $roduce and re$roduce for#s of o$$ression. 4s &e ha%e ex$lored collecti%ely our indi%idual histories, &e ha%e seen to &hat extent all of our desirin. life has been do#inated by the funda#ental la&s of the bour.eois ca$italist state and the 2udeo-+hristian tradition' all of our desires are sub9ected to ca$italis#Os rules concernin. efficiency, sur$lus %alue, and re$roduction. In co#$arin. our %arious Hex$eriences,K no #atter ho& free they #ay ha%e a$$eared, &e reco.ni-ed that &e are al&ays and fore%er obli.ed to confor# to the officially sanctioned sexual stereoty$es, &hich re.ulate all for#s of li%ed ex$erience and extend their control o%er #arria.e beds, houses of $rostitution, $ublic bathroo#s, dance floors, factories, confessionals, sex sho$s, $risons, hi.h schools, buses, etc.

,a(e 10 o2 16

The Academy hansen

deterritorialization [wave 2]

!lt @. 0e omin#
"he 4lternati%e is to beco#e-i#$erce$table.
Deleuze and )uattari, a Professor at the Sorbonne and an Institutional Psychiatrist, 19*+ [Gilles and Felix, A Thousand Plateaus, P. B79-B G! 4 first res$onse &ould be3 to be li*e e%erybody else. "hat is &hat Sier*e.aard relates in his story about the :*ni.ht of the faith,: the #an of beco#in.3 to loo* at hi#, one &ould notice nothin., a bour.eois, nothin. but a bour.eois. "hat is ho& Fit-.erald li%ed3 after a real ru$ture, one succeeds . . . in bein. 9ust li*e e%erybody else. "o .o unnoticed is by no #eans easy. "o be a stran.er, e%en to one=s door#an or nei.hbors. If it is so difficult to be :li*e: e%erybody else, it is because it is an affair of beco#in.. 1ot e%erybody beco#es e%erybody [and e%erythin.3 tout le #onde;"rans.!, #a*es a beco#in. of e%erybody6e%erythin.. "his re5uires #uch asceticis#, #uch sobriety, #uch creati%e in%olution3 an ,n.lish ele.ance, an ,n.lish fabric, blend in &ith the &alls, eli#inate the too-$ercei%ed, the too #uch- to-be-$ercei%ed. :,li#inate all that is &aste, death, and su$erfluity,: co#$laint and .rie%ance, unsatisfied desire, defense or $leadin., e%erythin. that roots each of us /e%erybody0 in oursel%es, in our #olarity. For e%erybody6e%erythin. is the #olar a..re.ate, but beco#in. e%erybody6 e%erythin. is another affair, one that brin.s into $lay the cos#os &ith its #olecular co#$onents. @eco#in. e%erybody6e%erythin. /tout le #onde0 is to &orld /faire #onde0, to #a*e a &orld /faire un #onde0. @y $rocess of eli#ination, one is no lon.er anythin. #ore than an abstract line, or a $iece in a $u--le that is itself abstract. It is by con9u.atin., by continuin. &ith other lines, other $ieces, that one #a*es a &orld that can o%erlay the first one, li*e a trans$arency. 4ni#al ele.ance, the ca#oufla.e fish, the clandestine3 this fish is crisscrossed by abstract lines that rese#ble nothin., that do not e%en follo& its or.anic di%isions' but thus disor.ani-ed, disarticulated, it &orlds &ith the lines of a roc*, sand, and $lants, beco#in. i#$erce$tible. "he fish is li*e the +hinese $oet3 not i#itati%e or structural, but cos#ic. Francois +hen. sho&s that $oets do not $ursue rese#blance, any #ore than they calculate :.eo#etric $ro$ortions.: "hey retain, extract only the essential lines and #o%e#ents of nature' they $roceed only by continued or su$er$osed :traits,: or stro*es. 6N It is in this sense that beco#in.-e%erybody6e%erythin., #a*in. the &orld a beco#in., is to &orld, to #a*e a &orld or &orlds, in other &ords, to find one=s $roxi#ities and -ones of indiscernibility. "he +os#os as an abstract #achine, and each &orld as an asse#bla.e effectuatin. it. If one reduces oneself to one or se%eral abstract lines that &ill $rolon. itself in and con9u.ate &ith others, $roducin. i##ediately, directly a &orld in &hich it is the &orld that beco#es, then one beco#es-e%erybody6e%erythin.. Serouac=s drea#, and already Eir.inia (oolf s, &as for the &ritin. to be li*e the line of a +hinese $oe#-dra&in.. She says that it is necessary to :saturate e%ery ato#,: and to do that it is necessary to eli#inate, to eli#inate all that is rese#blance and analo.y, but also :to $ut e%erythin. into it:3 eli#inate e%erythin. that exceeds the #o#ent, but $ut in e%erythin. that it includes;and the #o#ent is not the instantaneous, it is the haecceity into &hich one sli$s and that sli$s into other haecceities by trans$arency.6L "o be $resent at the da&n of the &orld. Such is the lin* bet&een i#$erce$tibility, indiscernibility, and i#$ersonality;the three %irtues. "o reduce oneself to an abstract line, a trait, in order to find one=s -one of indiscernibility &ith other traits, and in this &ay enter the haecceity and i#$ersonality of the creator. >ne is then li*e .rass3 one has #ade the &orld, e%erybody6e%erythin., into a beco#in., because one has #ade a necessarily co##unicatin. &orld, because one has su$$ressed in oneself e%erythin. that $re%ents us fro# sli$$in. bet&een thin.s and .ro&in. in the #idst of thin.s. >ne has co#bined :e%erythin.: /le :tout:03 the indefinite article, the infiniti%e-beco#in., and the $ro$er na#e to &hich one is reduced. Saturate, eli#inate, $ut e%erythin. in.

0e omin# is a tool for ever$one. 0$ han#in# ourselves- it alwa$s "e omes a %oliti al Auestion.
Deleuze and )uattari, a Professor at the Sorbonne and an Institutional Psychiatrist, 19*+ [Gilles and Felix, A Thousand Plateaus, P. B91! 4 &o#an has to beco#e-&o#an, but in beco#in.-&o#an of all #an. 4 2e& beco#es 2e&ish, but in beco#in.2e&ish of the non-2e&. 4 beco#in.-#inoritarian exists only by %irtue of a deterritoriali-ed #ediu# and sub9ect that are li*e its ele#ents. "here is no sub9ect of the beco#in. exce$t as a deterritoriali-ed %ariable of a #inority. (e can be thro&n into a beco#in. by anythin. at all, by the #ost unex$ected, #ost insi.nificant of thin.s. <ou don=t de%iate fro# the #a9ority unless there is a little detail that starts to s&ell and carries you off. It is because the hero of Focus, the a%era.e 4#erican, needs .lasses that .i%e his nose a %a.uely Se#itic air, it is

,a(e 11 o2 16

The Academy hansen

deterritorialization [wave 2]

:because of the .lasses: that he is thro&n into this stran.e ad%enture of the beco#in.-2e&ish of the non-2e&. 4nythin. at all can do the 9ob, but it al&ays turns out to be a $olitical affair. @eco#in.-#inoritarian is a $olitical affair and necessitates a labor of $o&er, an acti%e #icro$olitics. "his is the o$$osite of #acro$olitics, and e%en of Fistory, in &hich it is a 5uestion of *no&in. ho& to &in or obtain a #a9ority. 4s Faul*ner said, to a%oid endin. u$ a fascist there &as no other choice but to beco#e-blac*. 7nli*e history, beco#in. cannot be conce$tuali-ed in ter#s of $ast and future. @eco#in.-re%olutionary re#ains indifferent to 5uestions of a future and a $ast of the re%olution' it $asses bet&een the t&o. ,%ery beco#in. is a bloc* of coexistence. "he so-called ahistorical societies set the#sel%es outside history, not because they are content to re$roduce i##utable #odels or are .o%erned by a fixed structure, but because they are societies of beco#in. /&ar societies, secret societies, etc.0. "here is no history but of the #a9ority, or of #inorities as defined in relation to the #a9ority. 4nd yet :ho& to &in the #a9ority: is a totally secondary $roble# in relation to the ad%ances of the i#$erce$tible.

Bi ro%oliti al "e omin#s- however small- have ma ro onseAuen es.

Deleuze and )uattari, a Professor at the Sorbonne and an Institutional Psychiatrist, 19*+ [Gilles and Felix, A Thousand Plateaus, P. L7G-L71! >nce a.ain, this is not to say that the stru..le on the le%el of the axio#s is &ithout i#$ortance' on the contrary, it is deter#inin. /at the #ost di%erse le%els3 &o#enOs stru..le for the %ote, for abortion, for 9obs' the stru..le of the re.ions for autono#y' the stru..le of the "hird (orld' the stru..le of the o$$ressed #asses and #inorities in the ,ast or (estU0. @ut there is also al&ays a si.n to indicate that these stru..les are the index of another, coexistent co#bat. Fo&e%er #odest the de#and, it al&ays constitutes a $oint that the axio#atic cannot tolerate3 &hen $eo$le de#and to for#ulate their $roble#s the#sel%es, and to deter#ine at least the $articular conditions under &hich they can recei%e a #ore .eneral solution /hold to the Particular as an inno%ati%e for#0. It is al&ays astoundin. to see the sa#e story re$eated3 the #odesty of the #inoritiesO initial de#ands, cou$led &ith the i#$otence of the axio#atic to resol%e the sli.htest corres$ondin. $roble#. In short, the stru..le around axio#s is #ost i#$ortant &hen it #anifests, itself o$ens, the .a$ bet&een t&o ty$es of $ro$ositions, $ro$ositions of flo& and $ro$ositions of axio#s. "he $o&er of the #inorities is not #easured by their ca$acity to enter and #a*e the#sel%es felt &ithin the #a9ority syste#, nor e%en to re%erse the necessarily tautolo.ical criterion of the #a9ority, but to brin. to bear the force of the nondenu#erable sets, ho&e%er s#all they #ay be, a.ainst the denu#erable sets, e%en if they are infinite, re%ersed, or chan.ed, e%en they if i#$ly ne& axio#s or, beyond that, a ne& axio#atic. "he issue is not at all anarchy %ersus or.ani-ation, nor e%en centralis# %ersus decentrali-ations, but a calculus or conce$tion of the $roble#s of nondenu#erable sets, a.ainst the axio#atic of denu#erable sets. Such a calculus #ay ha%e its o&n co#$ositions, or.ani-ations, e%en centrali-ations' ne%ertheless, it $roceeds not %ia the States or the axio#atic $rocess but %ia a $ure beco#in. of #inorities.

,a(e 12 o2 16

The Academy hansen

deterritorialization [wave 2]

!2 Cesem"lin#
8ese#blance isnOt enou.h. 2ust li*e (illardOs lo%e only rese#bled a rat or his #other a do. T they did not truly beco#e.
Deleuze and )uattari, a Professor at the Sorbonne and an Institutional Psychiatrist, 19*+ [Gilles and Felix, A Thousand Plateaus, P. BNN! )e#ories of a )o%ie.oer. I recall the fine fil# (illard /197B, Janiel )ann0. 4 :@: #o%ie $erha$s, but a fine un$o$ular fil#3 un$o$ular because the heroes are rats. )y #e#ory of it is not necessarily accurate. I &ill recount the story in broad outline. (illard li%es &ith his authoritarian #other in the old fa#ily house. Jreadful >edi$al at#os$here. Fis #other orders hi# to destroy a litter of rats. Fe s$ares one /or t&o or se%eral0. 4fter a %iolent ar.u#ent, the #other, &ho :rese#bles: a do., dies. "he house is co%eted by a business#an, and (illard is in dan.er of losin. it. Fe li*es the $rinci$al rat he sa%ed, @en, &ho $ro%es to be of $rodi.ious intelli.ence. "here is also a &hite fe#ale rat, @en=s co#$anion. (illard s$ends all his free ti#e &ith the#. "hey #ulti$ly. (illard ta*es the rat $ac*, led by @en, to the ho#e of the business#an, &ho is $ut to a terrible death. @ut he foolishly ta*es his t&o fa%orites to the office &ith hi# and has no choice but to let the e#$loyees *ill the &hite rat. @en esca$es, after thro&in. (illard alon., hard .lare. (illard then ex$eriences a $ause in his destiny, in his beco#in.-rat. Fe tries &ith all his #i.ht to re#ain a#on. hu#ans. ;e even res%onds to the advan es of a $oun# woman in the offi e who "ears a stron# Dresem"lan eD to a ratE"ut it is onl$ a resem"lan e. >ne day &hen he has in%ited the youn. &o#an o%er, all set to be con9u.ali-ed, reoedi$ali-ed, @en suddenly rea$$ears, full of hate. (illard tries to dri%e hi# a&ay, but succeeds only in dri%in. a&ay the youn. &o#an3 he then is lured to the base#ent by @en, &here a $ac* of countless rats is &aitin. to tear hi# to shreds. It is li*e a tale' it is ne%er disturbin..

,a(e 13 o2 16

The Academy hansen

deterritorialization [wave 2]

!2 Ferm 40e omin#6

"he Per# relies on the H$ointK sub9ecti%ities &ithin the 14+, not allo&in. for fluid #ixin.. 4s lon. as theyOre still ad%ocatin. their $lan text, they cannot sol%e. Insisten e on stati identities reifies hierar hies.
Deleuze and )uattari, a Professor at the Sorbonne and an Institutional Psychiatrist, 19*+ [Gilles and Felix, A Thousand Plateaus, P. B9N-B9L! (hat constitutes arborescence is the sub#ission of the line to the $oint. >f course, the child, the &o#an, the blac* ha%e #e#ories' but the )e#ory that collects those #e#ories is still a %irile #a9oritarian a.ency treatin. the# as :childhood #e#ories,: as con9u.al, or colonial #e#ories. It is $ossible to o$erate by establishin. a con9unction or collocation of conti.uous $oints rather than a relation bet&een distant $oints3 you &ould then ha%e $hantasies rather than #e#ories. For exa#$le, a &o#an can ha%e a fe#ale $oint alon.side a #ale $oint, and a #an a #ale $oint alon.side a fe#ale one. "he constitution of these hybrids, ho&e%er, does not ta*e us %ery far in the direction of a true beco#in. /for exa#$le, bisexuality, as the $sychoanalysts note, in no &ay $recludes the $re%alence of the #asculine or the #a9ority of the :$hallus:0. >ne does not brea* &ith the arborescent sche#a, one does not reach beco#in. or the #olecular, as lon. as a line is connected to t&o distant $oints, or is co#$osed of t&o conti.uous $oints. 4 line of beco#in. is not defined by $oints that it connects, or by $oints that co#$ose it' on the contrary, it $asses bet&een $oints, it co#es u$ throu.h the #iddle, it runs $er$endicular to the $oints first $ercei%ed, trans%ersally to the locali-able relation to distant or conti.uous $oints. N 4 $oint is al&ays a $oint of ori.in. @ut a line of beco#in. has neither be.innin. nor end, de$arture nor arri%al, ori.in nor destination' to s$ea* of the absence of an ori.in, to #a*e the absence of an ori.in the ori.in, is a bad $lay on &ords. 4 line of beco#in. has only a #iddle. "he #iddle is not an a%era.e' it is fast #otion, it is the absolute s$eed of #o%e#ent. 4 beco#in. is al&ays in the #iddle' one can only .et it by the #iddle. 4 beco#in. is neither one nor t&o, nor the relation of the t&o' it is the in-bet&een, the border or line of fli.ht or descent runnin. $er$endicular to both. If beco#in. is a bloc* /a line-bloc*0, it is because it constitutes a -one of $roxi#ity and indiscernibility, a no-#an=s-land, a nonlocali-able relation s&ee$in. u$ the t&o distant or conti.uous $oints, carryin. one into the $roxi#ity of the other;and the border-$roxi#ity is indifferent to both conti.uity and to distance. "he line or bloc* of beco#in. that unites the &as$ and the orchid $roduces a shared deterritoriali-ation3 of the &as$, in that it beco#es a liberated $iece of the orchid=s re$roducti%e syste#, but also of the orchid, in that it beco#es the ob9ect of an or.as# in the &as$, also liberated fro# its o&n re$roduction. 4 coexistence of t&o asy##etrical #o%e#ents that co#bine to for# a bloc*, do&n a line of fli.ht that s&ee$s a&ay selecti%e $ressures. "he line, or the bloc*, does not lin* the &as$ to the orchid, any #ore than it con9u.ates or #ixes the#3 it $asses bet&een the#, carryin. the# a&ay in a shared $roxi#ity in &hich the discernibility of $oints disa$$ears. "he line-syste# /or bloc*-syste#0 of beco#in. is o$$osed to the $ointsyste# of #e#ory. @eco#in. is the #o%e#ent by &hich the line frees itself fro# the $oint, and renders $oints indiscernible3 the rhi-o#e, the o$$osite of arborescence' brea* a&ay fro# arborescence. @eco#in. is an anti#e#ory. Joubtless, there exists a #olecular #e#ory, but as a factor of inte.ration into a #a9oritarian or #olar syste#. )e#ories al&ays ha%e a reterritoriali-ation function. >n the other hand, a %ector of deterritoriali-ation is in no &ay indeter#inate' it is directly $lu..ed into the #olecular le%els, and the #ore deterritoriali-ed it is, the stron.er is the contact3 it is deterritoriali-ation that #a*es the a..re.ate of the #olecular co#$onents :hold to.ether.: Fro# this $oint of %ie&, one #ay contrast a childhood bloc*, or a beco#in.-child, &ith the childhood #e#ory3 :a: #olecular child is $roduced. . . :a: child coexists &ith us, in a -one of $roxi#ity or a bloc* of beco#in., on a line of deterritoriali-ation that carries us both off;as o$$osed to the child &e once &ere, &ho# &e re#e#ber or $hantasi-e, the #olar child &hose future is the adult. :"his &ill be childhood, but it #ust not be #y childhood,: &rites Eir.inia (oolf. />rlando already does not o$erate by #e#ories, but by bloc*s, bloc*s of a.es, bloc*of e$ochs, bloc*s of the *in.do#s of nature, bloc*s of sexes, for#in. so #any beco#in.s bet&een thin.s, or so #any lines of deterritoriali-ation.0 L (here%er &e used the &ord :#e#ories: in the $recedin. $a.es, &e &ere &ron. to do so' &e #eant to say :beco#in.,: &e &ere sayin. beco#in..

,a(e 14 o2 16

The Academy hansen

deterritorialization [wave 2]

!2 Fit$G@$m%ath$GIdentifi ation
@$m%ath$s ni e and identifi ations ute- "ut the$ arent the answer. We must rel$ on the %urel$ affe tive nature of the alternative and re(e t the %atheti !ff to solve.
Deleuze and )uattari, a Professor at the Sorbonne and an Institutional Psychiatrist, 19*+ [Gilles and Felix, A Thousand Plateaus, P. BP7-BP ! >nce a.ain, &e turn to children. 1ote ho& they tal* about ani#als, and are #o%ed by the#. "hey #a*e a list of affects. Qittle Fans=s horse is not re$resentati%e but affecti%e. It is not a #e#ber of a s$ecies but an ele#ent or indi%idual in a #achinic asse#bla.e3 draft horse-o#nibus-street. It is defined by a list of acti%e and $assi%e affects in the context of the indi%iduated asse#bla.e it is $art of3 ha%in. eyes bloc*ed by blinders, ha%in. a bit and a bridle, bein. $roud, ha%in. a bi. $ee$ee-#a*er, $ullin. hea%y loads, bein. &hi$$ed, fallin., #a*in. a din &ith its le.s, bitin., etc. "hese affects circulate and are transfor#ed &ithin the asse#bla.e3 &hat a horse :can do.: "hey indeed ha%e an o$ti#al li#it at the su##it of horse$o&er, but also a $essi#al threshold3 a horse falls do&n in the streetA It can=t .et bac* on its feet &ith that hea%y load on its bac*, and the excessi%e &hi$$in.' a horse is .oin. to dieA;this &as an ordinary si.ht in those days /1iet-sche, Jostoye%s*y, 1i9ins*y la#ented it0. So 9ust &hat is the beco#in.-horse of Qittle Fans? Fans is also ta*en u$ in an asse#bla.e3 his #other=s bed, the $aternal ele#ent, the house, the cafe across the street, the nearby &arehouse, the street, the ri.ht to .o out onto the street, the &innin. of this ri.ht, the $ride of &innin. it, but also the dan.ers of &innin. it, the fall, sha#eU These are not %hantasies or su"(e tive reveries' it is not a Auestion of imitatin# a horse- D%la$in#D horseidentif$in# with one- or even e&%erien in# feelin#s of %it$ or s$m%ath$. 1either does it ha%e to do &ith an ob9ecti%e analo.y bet&een asse#bla.es. "he 5uestion is &hether Qittle Fans can endo& his o&n ele#ents &ith the relations of #o%e#ent and rest, the affects, that &ould #a*e it beco#e horse, for#s and sub9ects aside. Is there an as yet un*no&n asse#bla.e that &ould be neither Fans=s nor the horse=s, but that of the beco#in.-horse of Fans? 4n asse#bla.e, for exa#$le, in &hich the horse &ould bare its teeth and Fans #i.ht sho& so#ethin. else, his feet, his le.s, his $ee$ee-#a*er, &hate%er? 4nd in &hat &ay &ould that a#eliorate Fans=s $roble#, to &hat extent &ould it o$en a &ay out that had been $re%iously bloc*ed? (hen Fof#annsthal conte#$lates the death throes of a rat, it is in hi# that the ani#al :bares his teeth at #onstrous fate.: This is not a feelin# of %it$as he ma:es lear> still less an identifi ation. It is a co#$osition of s$eeds and affects in%ol%in. entirely different indi%iduals, a sy#biosis' it #a*es the rat beco#e a thou.ht, a fe%erish thou.ht in the #an, at the sa#e ti#e as the #an beco#es a rat .nashin. its teeth in its death throes. "he rat and the #an are in no &ay the sa#e thin., but @ein. ex$resses the# both in a sin.le #eanin. in a lan.ua.e that is no lon.er that of &ords, in a #atter that is no lon.er that of for#s, in an affectability that is no lon.er that of sub9ects. 7nnatural $artici$ation. @ut the $lane of co#$osition, the $lane of 1ature, is $recisely for $artici$ations of this *ind, and continually #a*es and un#a*es their asse#bla.es, e#$loyin. e%ery artifice.

,a(e 15 o2 16

The Academy hansen

deterritorialization [wave 2]

!2 Biller
Biller ma:es a litan$ of errors in his readin# of DH)' misreadin#- ta:in# out of onte&tand not a tuall$ readin# their wor:s. Iou ant trust him.
;olland, Professor of +o#$arati%e Studies at >hio State 7ni%ersity, BG+/ [,u.ene, H8e$resentation and )isre$resentation in Postcolonial Qiterature and "heory,K Research in African )iteratures, NL.1! It is hard to *no& &here to be.in res$ondin. to )iller=s #aniacal attac* on Jeleu-e and Guattari, &hich ran.es fro# #inor #isreadin.s to serious #isre$resentation, and e5ually hard to a%oid a$$earin. 9ust as obsessi%e as he in tryin. to set the record strai.ht. In &hat follo&s, I ha%e decided to re$ay his close attention to detail in *ind /althou.h a co#$lete catalo.ue of the #isreadin.s in%ol%ed &ould exceed all reasonable bounds of a re%ie& essay0. >n one occasion, at the s#all end of the scale, )iller accuses Jeleu-e and Guattari of :e.re.ious: .eo.ra$hical i.norance /1910. 3 Fe clai#s that in a footnote to a sentence discussin. :certain co##ercial circuits in Africa: /191' )iller=s e#$hasis0, they confuse Guinea /&hich is in 4frica0 &ith 1e& Guinea /&hich is not0. @ut the $hrase to &hich the footnote is a$$ended is in fact a $arenthetical exce$tion to the state#ent about co##ercial circuits in 4frica. 4 Further#ore, the %ery next sentence in the $ara.ra$h, &hich references blac* sla%es in 1orth 4#erica, #a*es it $atently clear that Jeleu-e and Guattari=s discussion is not, pace )iller, li#ited to #atters 4frican. (hat is e.re.ious here is )iller=s de%otin. an entire $a.e to dissectin. an alle.ed :bloo$er: /1910 of such /non0#a.nitude, rather than to Jeleu-e and Guattari=s understandin. of .eo.ra$hy. 5 "he exa#$le is $ainfully tri%ial' the attention $aid to a #ere footnote, ho&e%er, is ty$ical and sy#$to#atic /for his state#ent of #ethod, see $.1 B0. )iller &ill focus on the footnotes at the ex$ense of the text' he &ill cite the bac* co%er of A Thousand Plateaus and rely on secondary sources such as @rian )assu#i=s +ser,s -uide to Capitalism and %chi.ophrenia or Pierre Fubac=s )es nomades that he finds :considerably easier: to read /1990, 6 rather than on other texts by Jeleu-e and Guattari the#sel%es;#ost notably /hat 0s Philosophy1, &here $erfectly clear ex$lanations of their ai#s and $rocedures in A Thousand Plateaus can be found. "he result is a #ore or less co#$lete #isreadin. of Jeleu-e and Guattari=s conce$t of no#adis#.

Theres not im%a t to their ar#ument.

;olland, Professor of +o#$arati%e Studies at >hio State 7ni%ersity, BG+/ [,u.ene, H8e$resentation and )isre$resentation in Postcolonial Qiterature and "heory,K Research in African )iteratures, NL.1! )iller=s diatribe a.ainst Jeleu-e and Guattari is all the #ore dis$iritin., $er$lexin.;and finally, irrele%ant; .i%en the fact that their conce$t of no#adis# has had $ractically no i#$act &hatsoe%er on the fields of colonial6$ostcolonial and franco$hone studies. >f course, critics in discussions of .lobali-ation often refer #eta$horically to the :no#adis#: of &riters in exile or in dias$ora, but this has nothin. to do &ith the for# of no#ad thou.ht Jeleu-e V Guattari cha#$ion in A Thousand Plateaus. 12 "he conce$t fro# this boo* &hich has had so#e i#$act on $ostcolonial studies is :rhi-o#e:;and this than*s in lar.e $art /as )iller notes, $. P0 to the influence of Jeleu-e and Guattari on the &or* of ,douard Glissant, the sub9ect of +elia @ritton=s re#ar*able study.

,a(e 16 o2 16