Department of English and Comparative Literature, American University in Cairo

" Nothing but Little Lines " /

Author(s): Steffen Stelzer and
Source: Alif: Journal of Comparative Poetics, No. 24, Archeology of Literature: Tracing the
Old in the New / : ( 2004), pp. 204-223
Published by: Department of English and Comparative Literature, American University in Cairo and
American University in Cairo Press

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4047426 .

Accessed: 09/01/2015 14:11
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Department of English and Comparative Literature, American University in Cairo and American University in
Cairo Press and Department of English and Comparative Literature, American University in Cairo are
collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Alif: Journal of Comparative Poetics.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 194.177.218.24 on Fri, 9 Jan 2015 14:11:41 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

"NothingBut Little Lines"

Steffen Steizer

For D. S.: TwoDedications

To You, in yourold age. Andto Philosophy.
I know,youdon'ttakethisjuxtaposition
tobe a titleofhonor.Notnecan honorforyou.1
essarily,youwouldsay,notnecessarily
I wonder,though.And I will, therefore,
not separate,forthe time
let's say,
One forliterature,
being,notwritetwoseparatededications.
andone forphilosophy.
*

can perhapsbe posed onlylate

ThequestionofWhatis Philosophy?
in life,withthearrivalofold age and thetimeforspeakingcorrectly.
(Deleuze/Guattari
1)2
*

Do youthinkthatsuchthingscouldbe a matter
ofage? Or,tobe more
precise,ofold age? Thereis an age ofphilosophy,
andmoreastonishingly,thereis an age foraskingwhatphilosophy
is. Seriously,soberly. An age whenit is timeto knowheror,at least,whenitis timeto
desireto knowher,finally.
*

This, at least, is what some philosopherssay. They also say, or

make someonesay, thatit is a matterof pleasures,of exchanging
pleasures. And it looks, rather,like exchangingpleasantries.
Remember,when Plato has those two old men, Cephalus and
Socrates,dance aroundeach otherand theirlife's journey?"Oh
yes, says Cephalus, it is marvellous,one is never left without.
When the pleasures of the body fade away, the pleasures and
charmsof conversation
increase.Oh yes, says Socrates,you know
how muchI love conversing,and thereis nothingbetterthanconversingwithold men."3
*

204

Alif24 (2004)

This content downloaded from 194.177.218.24 on Fri, 9 Jan 2015 14:11:41 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

But,Socrates,whenyou conversedwithyoungmen,how oftendid

you tellthemof yourlove of conversation?
And,by theway,didn't
yousay at theendofyourlifethatseeingandjudgingthingsthrough
thelensesofpleasureandpainis the"worstevil"becauseitnailsthe
soulto thebody?
*

... Thereare timeswhenoldage producesnoteternalyouthbuta sovereignfreedom,a pure necessityin whichone enjoysa moment
of
gracebetweenlifeanddeath,and inwhichall thepartsofthemachine
come together
to send intothefuturea featurethatcutsacross all
ages.... (1-2)
*

It seemstobe thebody.The bodyages.The agingphilosopher's

body
ages. And now will be timefortwo dedications.One to philosophy
whosetimehas come,"whena figureof lifehas grownold"-in the
wordsofHegel-and one to thequestion:Whatis Philosophy?
*

Old philosophy,
oldphilosophers,
alwaysold,oldbeforetheirtime.Oh,
old philosophers,
whatdidyoudo inyouryouth?Did youlive,already
how thefire
then,in yourold bodiesand minds,thinking,
wondering
would go out? Extinction
or exhaustion,
violenceor old age? One
wouldn'tknow,at thatage. Andprobably
itdidn'tmatter,
atthatage.
*

How or whenthe firewould die, was of no concern.One was so

involvedin one's plans and ideas-was just 'doingphilosophy'
thatthethought,
thequestion,neveroccurred.Whatdid it matter,
if one's lifewas goingto be a life where,as you,Deleuze, putit,
thereis no suddenbreakage,a life thatjust slowlygoes out,or if
it would,just stop?It didn'tseem to matter.For a philosopher,at
least, therewere guarantees.In case he would have wondered,
despitehis youth.It wentlike this: If one didn't reach old age,
thenwhatone was doing-philosophy-would reachforsureold
age, because it always alreadyhad, because fromthebeginningit
had gone out.
*

Picture old philosophersin their old bodies, Kant, Socrates,

Heidegger,picturethethoughts
traversing
theseold bodies,picture
whateach one thinksof his old body,and whathe thinksaboutthe
bodyitself,itsconcept.

Alif24 (2004)

205

This content downloaded from 194.177.218.24 on Fri, 9 Jan 2015 14:11:41 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

... Infact,thebibliography
on thenatureofphilosophy
is verylimited. It is a questionposed in a moment
at midof quietrestlessness,
to ask. (1)
night,whenthereis no longeranything
*

Or picturea scene:
In hisdimly-lit
roomGillesDeleuze,an old FrenchphilosoMidnight.
pher,stillrestless,thoughconsiderably
quieterthanin his younger
a sequenceofdress-rehearsals,
days,goesthrough
eachtimeposingas
an old man:he first
WilliamTurner,
thenchanges
poses as thepainter
costumeand reappearsas the FrenchwriterChateaubriand,
then
changesagainandappearsas theGermanphilosopher
Immanuel
Kant,
in orderto finallyappearas himself.In thelastpose, theone where
Deleuze,theold philosopher,
actstheold philosopher
Deleuze,I find
himmostconvincing.
He stepsforward
andrecites:Thisis thetime,at
wherethereis no longeranything
to ask (1). This is a
midnight,
prompt.It makesa ruthlessquestionappearon stage.Knowingno
mercywithan old man,itrusheson him,seizeshim,and witha mild
smile,asks: Whatis philosophy?
... In old age Turneracquired or won therightto takepaintingdown

a deserted
pathofno return
thatis indistinguishable
fromafinalquestion.(2)
Deleuze smilesvaguely,andto be givenreleasefromitsterribly
gentlegrip,he strikes
a deal withitthatallowshimtopaint.Whathe will
paint,he says,is a pictureof philosophy,
"in themannerof thelate
WilliamTurner."He intends,thereby,
he says,to do to philosophy
whatTurnerdid to painting,
namely,takeit downa desertedpathof
no return
thatis indistinguishable
froma finalquestion.Ifitwillever
be finished,
itwillbe a finepicture,
onewherephilosophy
is intheend
indistinguishable
fromWhatis philosophy?
Anditwillbe finished,
if
theold philosopher
has timeto finishit.
*

Notthatitwasn'talreadypainted.It was,butis goingtobe repainted.

Thus,thecurtain
canopenagain.Thistime,itopenson something
that
looks fromthedistancelike a vastexpanseof waterand,on closer
turnsoutto be an immenseswirland whirlof droplets,
scrutiny,
or,
rather,
sparksflashing
atinfinite
speed,faster
thanlight,andthusgone
whentheyappear.
*

206

Alif24 (2004)

This content downloaded from 194.177.218.24 on Fri, 9 Jan 2015 14:11:41 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

... Artis notchaos buta composition

ofchaos thatyieldsthevision
as Joycesays,a chaosmos,a comor sensation,
so thatitconstitutes,
posed chaos-neitherforeseenneitherpreconceived.
Arttransforms
as in ... Turner'sgoldenconchaoticvariability
intochaoidvariety,
(204-05)
flagration....
*

The nameDeleuze has forwhatthesepicturesdepictis an old name,

chaos. Chaos is, notonlyforDeleuze,butforso manyphilosophers
thatone maybe inclinedto say,"forphilosophy,"
a reasonably
unsetone wouldwantto be
tlingaffair.Something
threatening,
something
protectedagainst.Somethingwhose shadowNietzscherecognized
alreadyin Parmenides'"Being"whichhe understood
as theancient
gods' responseto Parmenides'desperatecall fora piece of wood to
carryhimoverthedepthofthewaters.A littlesomething,
then,tohold
on to?Something
a concept,or,atleast,a littleorderso that
graspable,
one mayfindone's waythrough-yes,through
what?
Notexactlydisorder:
notso muchbyitsdisorder
Chaosis defined
as by
theinfinite
speedwithwhicheveryform
taking
shapeinitvanishes
(1 18).
Well,whydo we thenrequire
usfromchaos?
justa littleordertoprotect
(201) Maybe,becausethereis moretothischaosthanwhatwouldlend
itselfto a depiction,
or even,a painting?
And,maybe,becausetheold
nameandthenewonearealreadya bittooorderly
forsomething
thatis
muchworse(ormuchbetter,
whoknows?)than"chaos."Foronething,
chaoscannotbe located.It is as muchtheswimmer
as thewater,or,to
put it morephilosophically,
chaos is as muchthe characteristic
of
as it is thecharacter
thoughts
of "things":
Nothing
is moredistressing
thana thought
thatescapesitselfthanideasthatflyoff,thatdisappear
hardly
orprecipitated
formed,
alreadyerodedbyforgetfulness
intoothersthatwe no longermaster.Theseare infinite
variabilities,
theappearingand disappearing
ofwhichcoincide.Theyare infinite
speedsthat
blendintotheimmobility
ofthecolorlessandsilentnothingness
theytraverse,without
natureand thought
(201). Thoughts,
without
thought?
*

Deleuze/Guattari
tellofthreewaysofstruggling
againstchaos,orrather,
ofthreeanda half:philosophy,
science,art,and,somehowunwelcome,
The first
religion.
threedeservethenameofthought.
Thelatter
doesn't,
really.Thisis duetodifferences
inthewaythetriadmeets"theenemy,"
on one side,and"religion"
does,orrather,
avoidsdoing,on theother.
*

Alif24 (2004)

207

This content downloaded from 194.177.218.24 on Fri, 9 Jan 2015 14:11:41 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

arenotverynew,butthatshouldnotdetract
The sceneand itssetting
probecauseitenhancestheold heroiccharm.It lookslikethis:thefirst
tectivelayeragainstchaosis opinion.You willrecognizean old friend
notyieldwhat
(andenemy)fromSocrates'time.Opiniondoes,however,
to bringa littleorderintochaoswhile
it promises.Worse,it pretends
ofpeople(206).
tothemisfortune
itand,thus,contributes
increasing
*

paintan old paintingusingold props:This

Again,Deleuze/Guattari
is all thatwe askforin orderto makean opinionforourselves,like
a sortof "umbrella"whichprotectsusfromchaos (202). The philosophical public will "understand" . . . Nietzsche's umbrella,

Derrida'sHeideggerianHeidegger'sSeinsvergessenheits-umbrella,
Nietzscheanumbrella,so manyumbrellas,so different.
*

Ouropinionsare madeupfromall this.Butart,science,andphilosophyrequiremore:theycastplanes overthechaos. Thesethreedisciplines are not like religionsthatinvokedynastiesof gods, or the
on theumbrelofa singlegod,inordertopainta firmament
epiphany
la, like the figures of an Urdoxa from which opinions stem.
and
science,and artwantus to tearopenthefirmament
Philosophy,
plungeintothechaos. Wedefeatitonlyat thisprice.(202)4
Althoughnot quite at theheightof the othersin thebattleagainst
chaos,religionsseem to warranta shortnotein thisscene,maybe,
in theold strugas combatants
becausetheycouldeasilybe mistaken
is notnecgle againstchaos.Butitis clearthattheircharacterization
of themas "things."It seemsmuchmore
essarilydue to recognition
in theeconomyof whatDeleuze/Guattari
to
they
play
due a function
amongsta variTheymark,so tospeak,onepossibility
call "thought."
can thinkof In Deleuze/
towardschaos thatthought
etyof attitudes
paint
Guattari
wordspaint,religionspaint,as artistsandphilosophers
paint?).So, theyseemto combatchaos.But unlikethe
(do scientists
aremadeon opintheirpaintings
ofartists
andphilosophers,
paintings
makingthemeven
them.Theyleave opinionsintact,
ions,notthrough
and
of stability
givingtheimpression
firmer,
paintinga firmament,
whilechaosboilsbeneath.
reliability,
*

Philosophy,science,and art,on the otherhand,fightthe enemy,

thefirstbastionagainstit,opinion:It is as ifthe
chaos,by fighting
withthe
struggleagainstchaos does nottakeplace withoutaffinity
Alif24 (2004)

208

This content downloaded from 194.177.218.24 on Fri, 9 Jan 2015 14:11:41 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

enemy,because anotherstruggledevelops and takes on more

importance-thestruggleagainstopinion,whichclaimstoprotect
usfromchaos itself(203).
*

do notadvocatea turning
It is important
to notethatDeleuze/Guattari
thelatterseemsto be the
awayfromchaostowardsopinion,although
is stillfocusedon chaos,butin
moreimportant
enemy.The attention
scisucha waythat,thereby,
opinionis drawnin. Whenphilosophy,
ence,andartopento chaos,plungeintoit,opinionfeelsattackedand,
indeed,is attacked.
Is opinion,then,a worseenemy,morethreatening
thanchaos?
Deleuze/Guattari
describein detail the different
ways in which
each of the threecombatantsdeals withits enemy.But as these
lines are dedicatedto you and to philosophy,I wantto see how
philosophiais painted.
*

Philosophy
presentsthreeelements,
each ofwhichfitswiththeother
twobutmustbe consideredfor
itself:theprephilosophical
planeitmust
layout(immanence),
thepersonaorpersonaeitmustinventandbring
to life(insistence),
andthephilosophical
conceptsitmustcreate(conand creatingconstitute
thephilosophsistency).
Layingout,inventing,
and intense
ical trinity-diagrammatic,
personalistic,
features.(76-77)
*

Riskinga certaindegreeof discourtesy

and takingadvantageof the
I'll
slynessof old age and philosophy, pass by thefirsttwo (immanenceandinsistence)
witha shortremark
andconcentrate
on thethird,
(consistency),
philosophy's
creationofconcepts.
*

whichintends
to protect
Philosophy
againstchaosandwhich,pursuing
thisintention,
doesnotimagineherself
tobe abletohoveroverchaos,or
toconstruct,
fromabove,somescreenofprotection,
butfights
byplungingintoit,mustin thisplungehavesomething
thatstabilizes.
The "raft"
towhichDeleuze/Guattari
intheplunge.
refer
repeatedly
mustbe created
And,furthermore,
it mustfloaton something.
Whatit floatson is, of
Thewaterthatcarriesis notsomecourse,water-thewaterthatcarries.
ontopofthewater,
thanwater.Itis theplaneofthe
thing
something
other
water.Deleuze/Guattari
callthisplanetheplaneofimmanence:
Theplane
is likea sectionofchaosandactslikea sieve(42).
ofimmanence
*

Alif24 (2004)

209

This content downloaded from 194.177.218.24 on Fri, 9 Jan 2015 14:11:41 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Ifthisplaneis,as Deleuze/Guattari
putit,laidoverchaos,thenwe have
thestrange
phenomenon
of a sectionof chaosoverchaos.Yet,thisis
themeaningofimmanence,
as usedbyDeleuze/Guattari.
Furthermore,
in keepingwiththeimageof thesieve,thissectionmustbe imagined
as consistingof holes throughwhich chaos flows (or flashes).
likea sectionofspaceinterspersed
withblackholes.
Something
*

Ifthisimageovertaxes
add toititselementalsignayourimagination,
turewhichI misquotedwhenI likeneditto water:Immanence
can be
said to be theburningissueofall philosophy
because it takeson all
thedangersthatphilosophy
mustconfront,
all thecondemnations,
perand repudiations
thatitundergoes.Thisat leastpersuades
secutions,
us thattheproblemofimmanence
is notabstractor merelytheoretical. ftis notimmediately
is so dangerous,butit
clearwhyimmanence
is. It engulfssages and gods. Whatsinglesoutthephilosopheris the
orfire.Immanenceis immanent
partplayed by immanence
onlyto
itselfand consequently
absorbsAll-One,and
captureseverything,
leaves nothingremainingto which it could be immanent(45).
Immanence,
then,is notwaterbutfire,all-consuming
fire.On a lighter
note,one couldsay thatimmanence,
as it is paintedhere,describesa
and furiousrefusalof anyresortto transcendence.
thorough
This,for
Deleuze, is themostimportant
markof philosophy.
And it is important,as we willsee, forold age.
The otherelementwithwhichphilosophy
takestheplungeintochaos,
is theconcept.ForDeleuze/Guattari,
is neither
a matter
philosophy
of
reflection,
norofcontemplation,
norofcommunication.
In short,
nota
matterof discourse.Philosophicalthought
is theactivityof creating
concepts:In thissensetheconceptis act ofthought,
itis thought
operatingat infinite
(althoughgreateror lesser)speed(21).
*

If thetaskDeleuze/Guattari
recognizedforphilosophy
is notcarried
outbysomeactivity
extraneous
tochaosbutwithin
it,thentheelement
suitableforthistaskmustsharethemaincharacter
of chaos,thatis,
infinite
speed.Itmustpossessthisqualityanditmust,todefeatit,possess a capacitythatchaoslacks.Chaos containsall possibleparticles
and drawsoutall possibleforms,whichspringup onlyto disappear
without
immediately,
or reference,
consistency
without
consequence.
Chaos is an infinite
speed ofbirthand disappearance.Nowphilosophywantstoknowhowto retaininfinite
speedswhilegainingconsis210

Alif24 (2004)

This content downloaded from 194.177.218.24 on Fri, 9 Jan 2015 14:11:41 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

tency,by givingthe virtual[i.e. chaos] a consistency

specificto it
(1 18). The important
is thatwhatever
is capapointin thisdescription
ble ofgivingconsistency
totheseparticlesandformsmustdo so withoutslowingthemdown.It mustitselfoperateat infinite
speed,thatis,
fasterthanlight.Deleuze/Guattari
findthisrequirement
fulperfectly
filledby thought
or, morespecifically,
philosophicalthought.
Their
ofthought
perception
is commonandold,anditis summedup intheir
quotation
fromEpicurus:"Theatomwilltraverse
spacewiththespeed
ofthought."
(38)
*

Whatis remarkable
aboutthisself-perception
of thought
is thatphilosophydisplayswithequalease a richtradition
ofthe'opposite'characterizationof thoughtand of 'the thinker.'There, words like
'thoughtful'
or 'mindful'ratherinvokeveryslow motion.But an
inquiryintothenatureof thought
shouldbe waryof arguingforone
side or theother.The intriguing
thingregarding
portraits
of thought
paintedwithspeed,is thattheyallowforbothperceptions.
*

Be thatas it may,philosophical
thought
couldnotperform
thetaskit
is meantfor,unlessit has anothertrait,namely,thecapacityto give
Thiswork,tobringconsistency
consistency.
intoa whirlofformsand
atinfinite
particles
traveling
speed,without
theirspeed,is for
reducing
Deleuze/Guattari
thework,theactivity
oftheconcept.
*

The word "concept"suggestsgestureslike "grasping,""holding

fast,""capturing,"
anditis thelatterthatrendersDeleuze/Guattari'
s
use of it best.One should,however,noticethat,giventheprevious
descriptionof philosophicalthoughtas plunginginto chaos, concepts cannotbe imaginedas means to get hold of particlesand
formsby 'fishingthemout.' In otherwords,conceptualthought
does notstandabove theswirlingsea of things.Whichplace would
it have to standon? It does notcatchthingsor tryto 'yank' them
out,even if sucha movecould be imaginedas occurringwithinfinite speed: It is as if one were castinga net,but thefisherman
always risksbeingsweptaway andfindinghimselfin theopen sea
whenhe thought
he had reachedport(203). Philosophicalthinking
is 'in thewater'or,morefaithful
to Deleuze/Guattari's
element,'on
fire.' The word 'consistency'describes,therefore,
capturingin
chaos.5
*

Alif24 (2004)

211

This content downloaded from 194.177.218.24 on Fri, 9 Jan 2015 14:11:41 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

To thismoment,
itseemsthatthingsarewellwithconceptual
thought:
it operatesat infinite
speed,does notslow downthingsand nothing
slows it down. To a closer look it appears,however,thatin this
smoothly-running
littlemachineonecandetectfromearlyon,andthen
withincreasing
botherandfascination
evidence,tracesofexhaustion,
in turns.Deleuze/Guattari
call theseweariness(fatigue).
*

Thesefirsttwoaspectsor layersof thebrain-subject,

sensationas
muchas theconcept,are veryfragile.Not onlyobjectivedisconnectionsand disintegrations
butan immense
wearinessresultsin sensations,whichhavenowbecomewoolly,letting
and
escape theelements
vibrations
itfindsincreasingly
tocontract.
Old age is thisvery
difficult
weariness:then,thereis eithera fall intomentalchaos outsideofthe
or a falling-back
on ready-made
plane ofcomposition
opinions...The
case ofphilosophy
is a bitdifferent
the
case
ofart],althoughit
[from
dependson a similarweariness.In thiscase,wearythought,
incapable
ofmaintaining
itselfon theplane ofimmanence,
can no longerbear
theinfinite
speedsofthethirdkindthat,ina mannerofa vortex,
measure theconcept'scopresenceto all itsintensive
at once
components
Itfallsbackon therelativespeedsthatconcernonlythe
(consistency).
successionofmovement
fromonepointtoanother,
fromone extensive
to another,
component
fromone idea to another,and thatmeasure
simpleassociationswithout
beingable toreconstitute
anyconcept.No
doubttheserelativespeedsmaybe verygreat,to thepointofsimulatingtheabsolute,buttheyare onlythevariablespeedsofopinion,of
discussionor "repartee,"as withthoseuntiring
youngpeople whose
mentalquicknessis praised,butalso withthosewearyold ones who
pursueslow-moving
opinionsand engagein stagnantdiscussionsby
speakingall alone,withintheirhollowedhead,likea distantmemory
of theirold conceptsto whichtheyremainattachedso as nottofall
backcompletely
intothechaos. (214)
So, thoughtages. Thereis youngthoughtand thereis weary,old
Or shouldI rather
thought.
say,thethinker's
bodyages,andhismind
thebody.Whatis this"body?"Is it
ages insofaras it thinksthrough
theso-called" natural,"
or"physical"body?Is Deleuze/Guattari'
s philosophy,then,a kindof 'physicism'whichsees theworld,or rather,
thecosmos,as well as thought
itself,as an immenseflurry
of 'particles?' Is itjust a clumsykindof naturalsciencethatwouldbe easy
foodfortherealscientist?
Notso easy.First,becausesucha 'natural212

Alif24 (2004)

This content downloaded from 194.177.218.24 on Fri, 9 Jan 2015 14:11:41 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

not suffiism' would be too 'natural'and, thus,notphilosophical,

cientlythought.
Second,it is becauseThoughtand Nature,Nous and
arethetwofacetsoftheplaneofimmaPhysis,forDeleuze/Guattari,
nence (38). That is, they are both what Deleuze/Guattari
call
And as
"prephilosophical"
aspects of philosophicalconceptuality.
and beingare said tobe
wherethinking
suchtheyallowfora situation
is nottheimageof thought
one and thesame. Or rather,movement
withoutbeingalso the substanceof being. WhenThales's thought
becomes
leaps out,itcomesbackas water.WhenHeraclitus'sthought
It is a singlespeedon bothsides: "The
polemos,itisfirethatretorts.
the
atomwilltraversespace with speedofthought."
(38)
*

Agingis, therefore,
as mucha matter
ofthought
as itis ofnature.But
does this"matter
of' mean?
what,precisely,
*

I havetorevise:thought
itselfdoesnotage.It agesas littleas nature,
or
livas life.Whatagesis thinking,
thinking
(of)things
or,forthatmatter,
inglife.Andthisis so becausetocreateis to resist(110). As, one may
say,to liveis to resist:booksofphilosophy
and worksofartalso containtheirsumofunimaginable
that
oftheadventof
sufferings forewarn
a people.Theyhaveresistance
incommon-their
todeath,to
resistance
to theintolerable,
toshame,and tothepresent(110).
servitude,
*

Philosophycreatesconcepts.Thereby,it resists.But resistancedoes

notonlyfanthefire,it exhaustsit,wearsit down.The age of conceptualthought,
beingtheage ofresistance,
be neiwould,therefore,
thertheage of thoseuntiring
youngpeople whosementalquickness
is praised,[northeage of] thosewearyold ones whopursueslowmovingopinionsbecausetheycan no longerbear theinfinite
speeds
(214). These ages are not good news for philosophy.Yet,
Deleuze/Guattari
have good news. News thatis not takenfrom
anotheryouth,a secondwindone maywishforin one's old age, or
news fromanotherkindof old age. No, theyhave news fromthe
arrivalofold age (quand vientla viellesse)(1).
The fireofconceptual
thought
maycertainly
bumhighanditmayfind
natures
whoarestrong
andfastenoughtobearitsinfinite
speeds.They
areDeleuzian/Guattarian
heroesofthought-the
philosopher,
thescientist,andtheartist-whoreturn
fromthelandofthedead,bringing
back
fromchaos(202) their
trophies.
Buttheyaretooheroic-and,atthesame
Alif24 (2004)

213

This content downloaded from 194.177.218.24 on Fri, 9 Jan 2015 14:11:41 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

time,notheroicenough.Theirfiremayhavereacheditsapexofheat,but
arrives
Whenthatmoment
notitsapexofexhaustion.
arrives,
philosophy
intheform
ofa question,
onstage,anditarrives
thequestion,
whatisphiata moment
"atmidnight,"
Andwhathappensatthatmoment,
losophy?
ofgracebetween
lifeanddeathis thecomingofage ofold philosophy:
WhenThales' thoughtleaps out, it comes back as water. When
becomespolemos,itisfirethatretorts
Heraclitus'thought
(38). When
becomesquestion,
itis old age thatreplies.
Deleuze/Guattari'
s thought
*

Is itnotpossiblethata philosopher
livepastmidnight?
Whatbecomes
ofconceptual
anddrifts
thought
whenitcrossesitsapexofexhaustion
intoweakerkindsof weakness?Stagnantdiscussionsof an old one
of
speakingall alonewithinhishollowedhead,likea distantmemory
his old conceptsto whichhe remainsattachedso as notto fallback
intothechaos?
completely
*

Whata strangeremark,
afterall Deleuze/Guattari
said aboutimmaattacksagainsttranscendence,
nence,afterall theirvehement
against
thepriestsand empires!Deleuze/Guattari,
at midnight,
observewhat
wholostthelastbit
happensto an old one whohas passedmidnight,
ofstrength
tokeepup withinfinite
required
speeds,tothinkcaptively,
Butthisobservation
isn'tthespeech(or thethought)
of
conceptually.
an old one's thought
It is theobservation
of someone
pastmidnight.
aboutsomething,
someonewho wentout,above, who leaped,and,
now, has no place to fall back to, not even old chaos. If
Deleuze/Guattari
hadstayedon withtheold one,we wouldhearan old
intothenight,
intothequestion,Whatis Philosophy?
person's thinking
But we don't.And thereis no further
question,no morephilosophy.
us aboutwhathappensto old oneswholost
Instead,someoneinforms
thestrength
That"someone,"is he
requiredforconceptualthought.
notthesame"Deleuze/Guattari"
whoinsistedon tellingus ofphilosand who so vehemently
attackedall kinds
ophy'sglory,immanence,
oftranscendence,
all priestsandempires?
*

butlittlelines,that'showhe sayshe conceivesofan oldman's

Nothing
whenfireandfatigue
meet.
project.6Littlelines,atthehourofsobriety,
Whenonedoesn'thavetobe someoneanymore,
whenit'senoughtobe,
whenone doesn'thaveto do philosophy,
whenthought
andlifemeet.
butlittlelines...withlittleelse.
When,when,when.Nothing

214

Alif24 (2004)

This content downloaded from 194.177.218.24 on Fri, 9 Jan 2015 14:11:41 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

orhisthought,
becomesgradA littledifficulty.
For,ifthephilosopher,
must
think
to
the
where
the
the
then
he
fatigue,
point
uallyexhausted,
stillallowsforthecreationof concepts.And,
cold,is stillconceptual,
But that
maybe,he will thinkup to the 'last' concept:philosophy.
he mustnotbe pastmidnight
and mustnot
means,as a philosopher,
thatthought
signifies
thinkpastthatquestion.Notto be pastmidnight
Yet, how shouldit stop,and who
wouldhave to stop,at midnight.
makesurethatthere
wouldbe theretonotice?How canthephilosopher
intothedepthof the
no thinking
pastmidnight,
will be no thinking
night?By makingsurenotto be, pastthattime.And,by makingsure
thatone doesn'tmistakethebabbleoftheold onesforthought.
ofDeleuze/Guattari'
s questionWhatisphilosoTheremarkable
feature
theirthought-liesinthe
whichis reflected
throughout
phy?-a feature
Questionsin theformof
datingofthisquestion.Thatis notnecessary.
'what is

...?'

of philosophicalthoughtas such,
belong to therepertoire

of any
whoseelementscan be well definedlogicallyand irrespective
One maysaythatthisis thecase wherephitemporal
determinations.
andAristotle
could
as "science,"as knowledge,
losophyis understood
be citedas thebestwitness.This definition
of thethreequestionsas metaphysics,
whichthe sciencetheyare seeking,i.e., philosophy
clear.First,we ask,"ifit [i.e.,somemustask-makes it sufficiently
"whyitis." IfI regardall ofthe
thing]is,"then,"whatitis,"andfinally,
as to a particular
threequestionsequally,thenI willfindno indication
asked.AndI couldcontimeof lifewhentheycouldbe appropriately
clude thatthisis so becauseof thenatureof 'science,'of 'scientific
knowledge'whichis timelessor,as theScholasticssay,"essential."
*

duplicity
which
Thereis,however,alreadyhereinAristotle,
a strange
shouldn'tmakeit so easytorelegatethisquestionto therealmofsciprocedure.
Aristotle
cannot,or does not,debate
entific-philosophical
theissueoftheappropriate
debating
questionsforknowledgewithout
thecapacity,orincapacity
ofhumanbeingstoreachsuchknowledge.
This debatehas two aspects.One: Are humanbeingscapableof the
forand whichhe calls
is searching
science,theknowledge,Aristotle
"thehighestknowledge?"Andanother:Which'humanity,'
or which
level of humanity
humanbeingshave to reachto be capable of it?
One could call this,quickly,superficially,
and belatedly,the transcendentalconditionfor knowledge.In later philosophers,like
Nietzscheand Deleuze, to name only two,thissecond aspecthas
Alif24 (2004)

215

This content downloaded from 194.177.218.24 on Fri, 9 Jan 2015 14:11:41 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

become immanent
to thought,
or, to use Deleuze/Guattari's
words,
immanent
toimmanence.
Philosophy
has,fora longtime,beenmoved
andirritated
bythisissue,andone ofitsformulations
is whatDeleuze
of thoughtand
calls in his book on Nietzsche"the noble affinity
in thisway,itbecomes,
life."7Once theold questionis re-formulated
of course,necessaryand possibleto look forthattimein a human
being'slifewhichwouldbe themostsuitable.
*

Deleuze/Guattari
themselvesare quite ambiguouson the issue of
insofaras itis
knowledge.I willoutlinesometraitsofthisambiguity,
relevant
forphilosophy.
*

The understanding
of philosophyas "knowledge,"thatis, "science"
in theliteralsense of thisword,marksa long tradition
of thought
in
whichbeginswithAncientGreekphilosophy
and is stillreflected
Hegel's thought.Thereis, however,a certainoscillationbetween
versionsof theconceptof science.Even there-wherephilosophy
didnothesitateto call itselfbythenameof 'science'-it hastenedto
untilthe necessityforthe title
explain,to correct,to distinguish,
itselfbecame so insignificant
thatit could do without.In a certain
sense,it may,however,be morecorrectto say thatphilosophyhas a
tense relationshipwith knowledge. Following the course of
Deleuze/Guattari's
one mightbe inclinedto saythatknowlthought,
aimofthisphilosophy.
Butthestress
edgecannotbe theoutstanding
would, then,be on the word "outstanding."Preciselybecause
thoughtis creation,forDeleuze/Guattari,
knowledgecan onlybe a
featureof thisactivity,not an aim thatit would envisage,beyond
itself:The conceptis obviouslyknowledge-butknowledgeof itself
and whatitknowsis thepureevent(33). In otherwords,knowledge
is notwhatone triesto reachthrough
concepts;it is theveryactivity of conceptual thought.This knowledge is not new for
Deleuze/Guattari.
Theytryto establishthatit is alreadya featureof
Greekphilosophy:It is oftensaid thatsincePlato, theGreekscontrastedphilosophy,
as a knowledgethatalso includesthesciences,
withopinion-doxa,
whichtheyrelegateto thesophistsand rhetors.
But we have learnedthattheoppositionwas notso clear-cut.How
could philosopherspossess knowledge,philosopherswho cannot
and donot wantto restoretheknowledgeofthesages and whoare
onlyfriends?(147)
*

216

Alif24 (2004)

This content downloaded from 194.177.218.24 on Fri, 9 Jan 2015 14:11:41 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The trailofknowledge,ofold philosophyas a knowledge,leads into

somethingstill older, into the realm of the sage. Or, as
call him,theold orientalsage (3). How, in which
Deleuze/Guattari
sense,could someonebe olderthanold? Would he be old in a difsense of "old?" If it was so, it wouldbe
ferentway,in a different
well worthpursuingthis lead, forI mighthave to revise whatI
I had foundregarding
thequestionwhatis philosophy?and
thought
regarding
old age.
*

Such an endeavoris, however,made quite difficultthroughthe

fact thatDeleuze/Guattaripaint the old orientalsage in a way
which suggests that its main purpose is to highlightthe old
other
philosopher,whileleavingthesage in some semi-obscurity:
civilizationshad sages, but the Greeksintroducethese "friends"
who are notjust more modestsages. The Greeksmightseem to
have confirmedthe death of the sage and to have replaced him
withphilosophers-thefriendsofwisdom,thosewhoseek wisdom
butdo notformallypossess it.But thedifference
betweenthesage
and thephilosopherwould not be merelyone of degree,as on a
scale: the old orientalsage thinks,
perhaps, in Figures,whereas
the philosopher inventsand thinksthe Concept. Wisdomhas
changeda greatdeal (3).
*

Yes, maybe,a greatdeal. But whathas changedlittleis thegesture,

of thisthinking:
tracedby Deleuze/Guattari,
Role-distribution.
Each
person,each personnageconceptuel,is describedin opposition
One nevergetstoknowthesage,onlythesageindisagainstanother.
tinctionfrom,or against,the friend.Neitherwill one meet the
philosopher
alone,onlythephilosopher
in contrastto thesage. If I
wereintroduced
to you,andyou wouldsay, 'I am a friend,'wouldI
understand?
WouldI understand
by lookingat you,or wouldI have
to look towardssomeoneelse? Whoserulesare these?Let me know
a philosopher.An old one, if you like. Or let me know a sage.
Oriental,and stillolder,ifyoulike.
*

Ofcourse,theold orientalsagealso thinks,

Deleuze/Guattari
say,only
differently.
And he knows,notmorethanthephilosopher,
notless,
For whomis thisdifference
onlydifferently.
so important?
It seems,
fortheone whothinks,
conceptually.
*

Alif24 (2004)

217

This content downloaded from 194.177.218.24 on Fri, 9 Jan 2015 14:11:41 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

[il est en
Thephilosopheris theconcept'sfriend;he is potentiality
puissance]oftheconcept(5). Is theolderorientalsage also en puiselse in hispotentiality
and
Is theresomething
sance,onlydifferently?
do notreallysay.Foritis somehowmuch
potency?Deleuze/Guattari
thefriends(philo)of theconcept.Fair
to understand
moreimportant
enough,you mightsay,isn'tthequestiona questionof (Greek)phiandnot(really)ofold orilosophyorofone ofofitsmodemversions,
entalwisdom?Fairenough.ButI wouldliketoknowjusthowold this
old orientalsage is.
*

muchlike "pre"oriental"meanspre-Greek,
For Deleuze/Guattari,
It means:one does notnecessarily
Socratic,"or "prephilosophical."
have to regardthesage as dead and replacedwiththephilosopher.
The philosopher,this old person,startedsomethingnew; thatis
to ask,ifthe"oriental"ceased,disIt is notso important
important.
appeared,withtheemergenceoftheGreek,or ifit livedon,maybe,
to ask: In whichsenseis
to veryold age. And it is notso important
do notseemto
theold orientalsage old? At least,Deleuze/Guattari
thinkof it.
But I would like to know.Will you,in yourold age, allow me to
leave conceptualthoughtaside, fora moment?Let us suppose it
was still possible to meet an old orientalsage, wouldn't you in
yourold age like to meet him? Or not anymore?Wouldn't you
wantto ask him about old age? Or have you heardenough?
I will let you read thesewordsfromsomeonewho wouldn'tmind
being called 'old orientalsage,' although,I fear,he is not what
Deleuze/Guattari
hadin mind.
Andthen,I willwritesomelittlelines.
Andthen,I willleave you-and thisdedication.
*

Jalalu'ddin
Rumisaid:
A littlebirdwas hunting
a worm:a catfounditsopportunityand seizedit.
It (thebird)was a devourerand a thingdevoured,and
was ignorant
of another
(beingengrossedin itshunting)
hunter
...
If theherbageis drinking
an
purewater,(yet)afterwards
218

Alif24 (2004)

This content downloaded from 194.177.218.24 on Fri, 9 Jan 2015 14:11:41 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

animal'sbellywillfeedon it.
Thatgrassis devouring
anddevoured:evenso (is) everythingthatexists...
Everyphantasyis devouringanotherphantasy:(One)
thought
feedson another
thought
Thou canstnotbe deliveredfromany phantasyor fall
asleepso as to escapefromit.8
*

I read:Thedevourer
devoured.
and"thought."
Thefateofboth"nature"
thatexists."The fateoffire.Oftheplaneof
Or,thefateof"everything
immanence.
Devourerdevoured.In an ancientGreekversion:
However,it is to be noticedthatthereare two ways in
whichfireceasesto exist;itmaygo outeitherbyexhaustionor by extinction.
Thatwhichis self-caused
we call
thatduetoitsopposites
exhaustion,
extinction.
[Theformer
is duetoold age,thelatter
toviolence.] Buteither
ofthese
waysinwhichfireceasestobe maybe brought
aboutbythe
samecause,for,whenthere
is a deficiency
ofnutriment
and
thewarmth
canobtainno maintenance,
thefirefails.9
If thereis no escape,foreverything
thatexists,neither
fromanything
thatexists,norto anything
thatexists,neither
to life,norto death,not
evento sleep,is thereanywhere
to go to?Who wouldbe thereto ask
you,whereareyou?Atmidnight,
or earlier,or at anytime?
*

Rumisaid:
The Elder(whichis) thyintellect,
has becomechildish
frombeinga neighbour
to yourselfishsoul (nafs)which
is in theveil.10
I read:Yes, the"intellect"
(thought,
nous)is old. He willnotbecome
youngthrough
anymeans.Buthe willtakefromthosein whosecompanyhe is. Old peoplebecomechildish
inthecompany
ofchildren.
Old
peoplebecomeold inthecompanyoftheold.In whosecompany
is the
philosopher
at midnight?
Eitherin thatofthefirst
onesorinthatofthe
secondones.Ifhe is inthecompanyofthedevourer-devoured,
at midthatis, in his owncompany,
night,
by himself,
he has butone second.
Let himthinkofthatmoment
whathe will,eventhatitbe themoment
Alif24 (2004)

219

This content downloaded from 194.177.218.24 on Fri, 9 Jan 2015 14:11:41 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ofwhatis philosophy?
wherehisthinking
arrivesat itself,
themoment
butthechildis "in theveil,"andso he
It is a moment
ofchildishness,
takesittobe old.
Rumisaid:
Who is a "Shaykh?"An old man (pir),thatis (to say),
white-haired.
Do you apprehendthe meaningof this
'(white)hair,'0 hopelessone.
Blackhairis self-existence:
(he is not"old") tillnota sinremains.
gle hairofhis selfishness
has ceased,he is "old" (pir).
Whenhis self-existence
*

I read:"Old" meansmanythingsand,maybe,one.Besidesold nature

thatis,inhis
andold thought
thereis old company.Whois byhimself,
whatever
theirage,theyarechildren.
orherowncompany,
Therefore,
it.The youngcan
it is possibleto refuseone's age, evenby stressing
itorhidingit.Theold can refuse
refusebeingyoung,through
stressing
to be old,hidingitor stressing
it.
A philosopher
be too tiredto
can,fora momentof immensefatigue,
clown.
Butin whosecompanywillhe be?

PS (FramD. S. ti-S. S.).'

a t the/acpproci of the/mivdAl~ hexelI
v41t hovw,both sertoulkactd sober (at lea1t vmst
k
to-he' re fon
of thelta-ne'),stowL C dowcv
vo
vVtev
the'
conceptv
soinet-wnkevcapel
,peed4, that
mnet
acvu I fs'dl myselfnmeastwCnosimple'aci,oct' for the/
Mo-tpart;
wt4tr 'trap9)e'e'- cfrom,
orveeytenv~ve/c onL n4t to-the/other, sru't nk
dzeided2y wooVy,al-bit wearytobbe'-ue, ad4int
tothe'e4cap contrcct
d4f6xv2
6vq'
ele4n4-ty aAnd
&vda ti-rau . I fiea I muvt falT
bcck o-n rea dy- nadel op nz&vce
I stwrel
ac heW
L4t,

don?t want t- faW into- mnacil' ch-o ot3ide they

ptlcie'ofcotnpositLoi'.LdeVlWrgniia VooI, I W1e'to-

keep my feet on' the/ trLpof paven-e41tover the7

220

Alif24 (2004)

This content downloaded from 194.177.218.24 on Fri, 9 Jan 2015 14:11:41 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

'I
I
a' opvn, tv
I hawve
abyw.SL-rce'yowrcsy
w po&YLe a*ud'
1
refe to-be' o14&htdinq,,CtacOns'
Lttle/
tJe*Yv
StreSW4' t.I I cay'Iy
Caej y?WWget vAtomen. Avtdcomneto-thinkof C, whywait
1ex, from
do7k'
ktck'for midiihtto-a thequue4ttoi?The'
beyond'
Fro-ml
(,v, hee' I . What Phdo-Sophy?
(or he12a4th)acWchaowTI p1wnpfor Dele,~e I
re4 ne
b
'
reply: Phdosophy f 1e,'
re,tcanc &ckphWaophy.PhaosophyCkphdosophy.
avrow (k al row.
As,eve-r,
I've' WtW
1opeZe4lone that I acnm,
got av fiA
heib4 of har, acv I rea4y do-Wtmit{d/"WvLooI"l
to-av nie' hafrofseZfhvI get dowvn/
optovW
amnl
vne-.MyseZf-eitence tWZhastcetedsevt,
old whateverthe'artentalcael vnightthftk.Yet
t only ateer mind
I'dXlde' to-mn-eth,
one'
where'I acm.
whewsv
no
k+icwsNotes
1 My essaybeginswithsimple/complex
sees itnecesquestions:Philosophy
time.Is timeonlyan objectofphilosophical
saryto comprehend
thought,
timeforphioris thought
itselfa matter
oftime?Andis therea particular
losophy? These questions are triggeredby a reading of Gilles
Deleuze/FelixGuattari'sWhatis Philosophy?The essaywill,therefore,
elaborate the questions as far as possible, unto the stage of
theatre."
ForDeleuze/Guattari,
Deleuze/Guattari's
"philosophical
philosher
as
and
nottimeless.Theydescribe
ophyis,firstly,
"old,"
theygiveher
an even olderprecursor,
the"old orientalsage." Thoughtitselfhas, for
Deleuze/Guattari,
an extremelytemporalcharacter.And thirdly,the
of philosophy
to understand
of a philosoattempt
herself,
or,theattempt
pherto understand
philosophy,
has forDeleuze/Guattari
also a time:old
indicatedin thetitleofDeleuze/Guattari's
age. Thisattempt,
book(What
Is Philosophy?),
is, ofcourse,notwithout
echoes.It echoes(or is echoed
otherbooks,othertitles(e.g. Heidegger'sWhatis
by)otherphilosophers,
Philosophy?).Neitheris theascription
of philosophy
to old age without
parallels:Hegel's Owl ofMinervabeginsherflight"whena figureoflife
has grownold." It is, therefore,
to quicklyglancesideways.
inevitable,
This essay,however,concentrates
in a secondmoveon the"passionof
as itis describedin an essayHannahArendtwroteat theoccathinking"
Alif24 (2004)

221

This content downloaded from 194.177.218.24 on Fri, 9 Jan 2015 14:11:41 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

sion of a birthday
of herteacherM. Heidegger("MartinHeideggerat
is a giftto a philosopher
Eighty").It is noteworthy
thatthiscontribution
inhisold age. It is surprising
tolearnto whichextentthistimelyoccasion
leadshertocelebratethetimelessqualityofa "passionofthinking."
Ifthe
can swingso easilyfromone sideto theother,thenitis advispendulum
able to ask moreclosely:is whatis describedin thesephilosophical
texts
forphilosophical
an extra(and in others)as "old age" a marker
thought,
oris "old age"
neoussignpost
bywhichphilosophy
can recognizeherself,
Are there,in otherwords,other
alwaysalreadydefinedphilosophically?
conceptsof "old age"? My essay suggests,in fact,thatthereare other
waysofconceiving"old age." Anditdoes thisbyreferring,
in theend,to
"old orientalsages" thatare not compatiblewiththose hintedat in
Deleuze/Guattari'sthought(e.g. Rumi). For Arendt,Hegel, and
"MartinHeideggerat Eighty,"TheNew York
Heidegger,see: H. Arendt,
Reviewof Books 17.6 (October21, 1971), availableat <www.nybooks.
com/articles/10408>;
G. W. F. Hegel, "Vorrede,"Grundliniender
Philosophiedes Rechts(Frankfurt
a.M.: Suhrkamp
Verlag,1970),Bd. 7,
28; M. Heidegger,Whatis Philosophy?
(Englishand German),trans.W.
KlubackandJ.T. Wilde(New York:TwaynePublishers,
1958).
2 Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari,Whatis Philosophy?,trans.Hugh
Tomlinsonand GrahamBurchell(New York:ColumbiaUP, 1994). All
references
to thistextin thearticlewill simplyreferto thiseditionand
indicatepage numbersin parentheses.
This essay calls frequently
on
Deleuze/Guattari's
bookandentersin dialoguewithit.My citations
from
theirbookwillbe initalicsfollowedbypagenumbers.
Accordingly,
what
is originally
italicizedin thebookwillbe in regularfont(as customary
in
print).Occasionally,citationsfromthe Englishtranslation
are in this
essayaccompanied
byphrasesfromtheoriginalFrench,toaddtotheprecision thatmighthave been lost in translation.
Wordsbetweensquare
brackets
inthecitations
ofDeleuze/Guattari
aremyownadditions
toclarifyreferences.
GillesDeleuze etFelixGuattari,
Qu'est-ceque la philosoEditions
de
phie? (Paris:
Minuit,1991).
3 Plato. The Republicof Plato, trans.A. Bloom (New York:Basic Books,
1991),Book I, 328e.
4 Deleuze/Guattariare not very precise on what is tornopen: once
it's the umbrella,thenit is the firmamentwhich,accordingto his
own declarationis paintedon the umbrella.This seems to indicate
a desire to circumventa problemregardingthose who "figureon
the firmament."
5 Deleuze has foundthisactivity
in suchvariedareasas contemporary
music
222

Alif24 (2004)

This content downloaded from 194.177.218.24 on Fri, 9 Jan 2015 14:11:41 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

In thecontextofthe
andthe"rhythm
thatanimatestheStateApparatus."
or magicemperors.
latter,
he speaksof themystery
"oftheBinder-Gods
fromtheirsingleeye signsthatcapture,
tieknots
One-Eyedmenemitting
at a distance."It wouldbe interesting
to know,ifthereis a way leading
fromthosegod-mentoconceptual
Thereare,indeed,signs.After
thought.
occurina chapter
all,Deleuze's god-men
aboutthe"StateApparatus"
and
has a storyor twoto tellaboutphilosophers
philosophy
and statesmen.
See Gilles Deleuze, A Thousand Plateaus, trans. Brian Massumi
ofMinnesotaPress,1987),424.
(Minneapolis:University
6 L'Abecedairede GillesDeleuze,avec ClaireParnet;GillesDeleuze's ABC
Primer,withClaire Parnet,trans.CharlesJ. Stivale,II, 21. <www.
langlab.wayne.edu/CStivale/D-G/ABC2.html>,
September
25, 2003.
7 Gilles Deleuze, Nietzscheand Philosophy(New York: ColumbiaUP,
1983), 101.
8 Jalalu'ddinRumi, The Mathnawi,ed. and trans. R. A. Nicholson
E.J.W.GibbMemorialTrust,1982),Book V, 45.
(Cambridge:
9 Aristotle,
On Youth,Old Age,On Lifeand Death,On Breathing,
trans.G.
R. T. Ross,Part.5, TheInternet
ClassicsArchive,
<http://classics.mit.edu/
June14,2004.
Aristotle/youth_old.html>,
10Rumi,Book V, 46.
11Rumi,Book III, 100.

Alif24 (2004)

223

This content downloaded from 194.177.218.24 on Fri, 9 Jan 2015 14:11:41 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions