The Great Politics and the revolutionary
Another point we have to make is to identify the revolutionary type of the Anti-Œdipus. The physiognomy has been already outlined in two different forms in Anti-Œdipus. Guattari in an interview for the magazine «Neue Zeitung» in 1972 with regards to the identification among analyst, patient and activist says: “First of all no one has ever said that the analyst is the same as the schizophrenic man but that the analyst, as well as the activist or the writer or anybody else, is more or less engaged in a schizoid process and there is always a difference between the schizo process and the process of a schizophrenic man interned in an insane-asylum, as his schizo process is blocked or goes uselessly around in circles. We are not saying that the revolutionary group need to identify with the madmen going uselessly round in circles, but that they need to push their actions into a schizo- way process.” According to Guattari the schizophrenic man does not coincide with the madman but becomes schizo when he clashes with an individual or collective «desiring process» which holds at its centre a «libidinal energy» able to drive him from an assessed subject to a new open code subject, passing through a metamorphosis and a process of both de-subjectivation and neo-subjectivation. In this transition we can identify parts of former subjectivity - the doctor, the worker, the white man, the human being - and some of the new one - the homosexual, the trans-gender, the foolish man, the analyst. It is therefore not possible to locate one single typical revolutionary man, but multiple individual and/or group connections in schizo- revolutionary processes. What revolution really requires, according to Guattari, is an experimental revolutionary process and not revolutionary subjects tailored by ideology. “Repeated mistakes and insignificant results are more necessary than a stupid passivity and claw back mechanisms.”To deeply understand the concept of the revolutionary man as intended by Deleuze we need to look at Klossowski again and in particular to his speech at the Collége de Philosophie in Paris during a conference entitled Nietzsche, Polytheism and Parody in 1957. Klossowski was considered one of the central figures in French Nietzsche’s studies, especially after his masterful translation of Nietzsche’s The Gay Science in 1954. In this speech Klossowski underlines the figure of the «actor as interpreter of a celestial revelation» able to contrast the catechontic institutions with artistic antinomic «accelerated» creations: “But art has a very wide meaning, and in Nietzsche, this category includes institutions as much as works of free creation. For example - and
here we can see immediately what is at issue-
how does Nietzsche consider the Church?
For him, the Church is constituted grosso
modo by a cast of profound impostors:
the priests. The Church is a masterpiece
of spiritual domination, and it required
that impossible plebian monk, Luther, to
dream of ruining that masterpiece, the last
edifice of Roman civilization among us. The
admiration Nietzsche always had for the
Church and the papacy rests precisely upon
the idea that truth is an error, and that art,
as willed error, is higher than truth. This
is why Zarathustra confesses his affinity
with the priest, and why, in the Fourth
Part, during that extraordinary gathering
of the different kinds of higher men in
Zarathustra's cave, the Pope -the Last Pope-
is one of the prophet's guests of honor. This
betrays, I think, Nietzsche's temptation
to foresee a ruling class of great meta-
psychologists who would take charge of
the destinies of future humanity, since they
would know perfectly both the different
aspirations and the different resources
capable of satisfying them. (NPP; 106, 107)
What he is saying is that Nietzsche at the
end of the 80’s of the XIX century had
already understood that the Great Politics
needed an entertainment sphere where
institutions, dominating castes, gregarious
masses could express a certain will to
power. Deleuze admires Klossowski and his
Nietzsche (as he will write in a letter sent
to him in December 1969) and will retrieve
the concept of acceleration of processes of
a community of irregulars who confound
all codes, thus entwining Klossowski-
Nietzsche’s conspirative theory with the
political riots of the 70’s in France. Their
alliance is clearly detected in the talks at
the famous meeting of Cerisy-la-Salle in
July 1972 where Klossowski defines the
fragment entitled The Strong of the Future
- 9 [153] - as the «heart of conspiracy».
After he has finished reading the fragment
he poses a question wondering what
Nietzschean comportment we would adopt
in relation to the current upheavals -
namely youth poverty, revolutionary riots,
clashes between the adverse forces - "no
longer from the point of view of power but
from the perspective of the vicious circle”
to conclude that he would support the
comportment "of the vicious circle, seen
as a manifestation of the nihilist judgment
passed upon all acting." (CV, 38)
Klossowski, choosing the comportment of the nihilist judgment, reaffirms Nietzsche’s parodistic behaviour on the economic planetary planning scenario and again he reminds an attentive audience - Deleuze, Lyotard, Derrida, Calasso and Nancy - the thought of eternal return: “As I have insisted, this thought, as the theme of Nietzsche’s highest contemplation, becomes the instrument of conspiracy. It is from this stage that the god of the vicious circle can truly be considered the blossoming of a delusion. The question that I now pose is whether delusory or deranged behaviour, in this sense, when confronted with reality, can become in any way efficacious, or if, more generally,
Klossowski, choosing the comportment of the nihilist judgment, reaffirms Nietzsche’s parodistic behaviour on the economic planetary planning scenario and again he reminds an attentive audience - Deleuze, Lyotard, Derrida, Calasso and Nancy - the thought of eternal return: “As I have insisted, this thought, as the theme of Nietzsche’s highest contemplation, becomes the instrument of conspiracy. It is from this stage that the god of the vicious circle can truly be considered the blossoming of a delusion. The question that I now pose is whether delusory or deranged behaviour, in this sense, when confronted with reality, can become in any way efficacious, or if, more generally,
any deranged comportment might be said
to constitute an efficient resistance in the
face of a determined adverse force.”(CV,
38) According to Klossowski, Nietzsche
moves from the position of the biological
contemplative observer of the law of the
Eternal Return to the one of the strong
political watcher, thus building - employing
Deleuze and Guattari terminology - a real
war machine so to be able to transform
the Eternal Return into a conspiracy which
should subvert the current domination of
the levelled industrialized man. But why
should such conspiracy be delirious? For
at least two reasons: the first one because
the double parody of the current social
model and of its simulacrum subvert all
codes, as a consequence of the nihilist
judgment passed upon all acting. The second
reason is linked to Deleuze and Guattari’s
interpretation of the post-68 revolutionary
riots: “Delirium is the general matrix of
every unconscious social investment.
Every unconscious investment mobilizes
a delirious interplay of disinvestments, of
counterinvestments, of overinvestments”.
(AO, 277) Similarly Klossowski’s delirium -
the radical departing from the established
path - coincides with the delirious polarity
in Anti-Œdipus: if every social investment
is delirious, the same will be for a no
longer secret conspiracy plotted by idle
urban dissidents whose aim justifies and
realizes itself through the same means
of manifestation. The question at this
stage is about fulfillment: can the schizo-delirious approach be incisive both in the
revolutionary riots of the ‘70s and on a any
other future moment to come, as the law
of the Vicious Circle seem to suggest? In
Klossowski words the question is: does the
schizo delirious process simply represent
the current version of the Vicious Circle
or are we in front of a general peremptory
coherent identity between Process, Circle
and Return?
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento