The sunset of Unpolitical Nietzsche
Pt. V - Excerpt from the essay «Money, Revolution and Acceleration in Deleuze and Guattari's Anti-Oedipus», Obsolete Capitalism Free Press/Rizosphere, 2016
Deleuze wrote two Nietzsche’s monographs, one entitled Nietzsche and Philosophy (1962) and the other simply Nietzsche (1965). The first monograph opens the «golden decade» about Nietzsche - which will be completed with Anti- Œdipus in 1972 and with the Cerisy-la-Salle conference of July 1972 entitled «Nietzsche aujourd’hui?» - and is considered the most complete and detailed analysis of Nietzsche’s philosophy. In chapters II, III and IV the French philosopher analyzes the «infamous» text The Will of Power and other writings of the same years: Beyond Good and Evil and On the Genealogy of Morals. In the book dated 1962 we have no reference of the accelerationist fragment (here numbered 898 as per Nietzsche’s sister and Peter Gast’s notation). As a reference for his first monograph, Deleuze considered Gallimard La Volontè de Puissance edition (1947-48) that, according to the Italian curator Fabio Polidori, is an edition based on the order previously given by Friederich Wuerzbach in his Das Vermaechtnis Friedrich Nietzsche (Salzburg-Leipzig 1940) and that lists a completely new and enriched order of texts if compared to the second edition of the famous Der Will zur Macht. Despite the presence of the fragment «The Strong of the Future» in Wuerzbach’s anthology, Deleuze does not mention any «acceleration» or «future forces» even in his second monograph Nietzsche (1965). It is with Pierre Klossowski’s analysis in 1969 (Nietzsche and the Vicious Circle) that the accelerationist fragment becomes central, creating a resolutive axis Deleuze - Klossowski responsible for a new account of Nietzsche’s authentic thought. It is while talking about Nietzsche’s text in an interview with Jean-Noel Vuarnet in February 1968 that we may understand the reason of the «missing notes» about the accelerationist fragment in Anti-Œdipus. Here’s an abstract of the interview: “Jean- Noel Vuarnet: Gallimard's re-edition of Nietzsche's complete works has started to appear on the shelves. You and Foucault have been credited with "responsibility" for the first volume. What exactly was your
role? Gilles Deleuze: We played a small
role. You are no doubt well aware that the
whole point of this edition is to publish all
posthumous notes, many of which have
never seen the light of day, by distributing
them chronologically in the order of the
books that Nietzsche himself published.
Accordingly, The Gay Science, translated by
Klossowski, includes the posthumous notes
of 1881-1882. The authors of this edition are,
on the one hand, Colli and Montinari, to whom
we are indebted for the texts, and on the
other, the translators, for whom Nietzsche's
style and techniques have posed enormous
problems. We were responsible only for
grouping the texts in order. (DI, 135). As per
Deleuze and Foucault’s explicit request,
the first volume of Nietzsche’s OEuvres
philosophiques complètes (Gallimard, Paris
1967) is translated by Klossowski as well as
Fragments posthumes 1887-88 (1976). At
the same time Klossowski’s book Nietzsche
and the Vicious Circle (1969) introduces the
«accelerationist fragment», a fragment
that he received together with the
«rough material» delivered from Colli and
Montinari even before they enumerated the
fragments with the order we know today.
A further confirmation comes from the
notes of the edition of his book: Klossowski
himself provides no references for the
sources of his citations from Nietzsche's
notebooks. At the conclusion of the French
text of the book, he simply appends the
following note: 'All the citations from
Nietzsche are taken from the posthumous
fragments - and in particular, from those
of his final decade 1880-1888.' (NVC, 262).
As shown in our previous essay The strong
of the future: Nietzsche’s accelerationist
fragment in Deleuze and Guattari’s Anti-
Œdipus the two French philosophers used
the expression «accelerate the process»
in their Anti-Œdipus (1972) as correctly
introduced by Klossowski’s Nietzsche and
the Vicious Circle and therefore they did not
deliberately quote any specific reference
because at the time being Klossowski was
working on the edition of the Unpublished
Fragments and Deleuze was himself
responsible for the French edition.
READ MORE
READ MORE
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento