Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Introduction
- 1 Events, Becoming and History
- 2 Of the Rise and Progress of Philosophical Concepts: Deleuze's Humean Historiography
- 3 Theory of Delay in Balibar, Freud and Deleuze: Décalage, Nachträglichkeit, Retard
- 4 Geohistory and Hydro-Bio-Politics
- 5 The Thought of History in Benjamin and Deleuze
- 6 The Cannibal Within: White Men and the Embodiment of Evolutionary Time
- 7 Ageing, Perpetual Perishing and the Event as Pure Novelty: Péguy, Whitehead and Deleuze on Time and History
- 8 Cinema, Chronos/Cronos: Becoming an Accomplice to the Impasse of History
- 9 Deleuze's Untimely: Uses and Abuses in the Appropriation of Nietzsche
- 10 Is Anti-Oedipus a May '68 book?
- 11 Molar Entities and Molecular Populations in Human History
- Notes on Contributors
- Index
10 - Is Anti-Oedipus a May '68 book?
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 12 September 2012
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Introduction
- 1 Events, Becoming and History
- 2 Of the Rise and Progress of Philosophical Concepts: Deleuze's Humean Historiography
- 3 Theory of Delay in Balibar, Freud and Deleuze: Décalage, Nachträglichkeit, Retard
- 4 Geohistory and Hydro-Bio-Politics
- 5 The Thought of History in Benjamin and Deleuze
- 6 The Cannibal Within: White Men and the Embodiment of Evolutionary Time
- 7 Ageing, Perpetual Perishing and the Event as Pure Novelty: Péguy, Whitehead and Deleuze on Time and History
- 8 Cinema, Chronos/Cronos: Becoming an Accomplice to the Impasse of History
- 9 Deleuze's Untimely: Uses and Abuses in the Appropriation of Nietzsche
- 10 Is Anti-Oedipus a May '68 book?
- 11 Molar Entities and Molecular Populations in Human History
- Notes on Contributors
- Index
Summary
Everything begins with Marx, continues on with Lenin, and ends with the refrain, ‘Welcome, Mr Brezhnev.’
Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, Anti-OedipusWhen Gilles met Félix
Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari met in the summer of 1969. Deleuze says of their meeting that Guattari was the one who sought him out, that at the time he didn't even know who he was. Evidently their meeting went well because Deleuze suggested they work together (Nadaud 2006: 12). A lot of ink has been spilled speculating about how their collaboration worked in practice, all too often with the nefarious motive of sorting out who wrote what. It seems to me, however, that Deleuze says it all when he says that they each thought that the other had gone further than they had and therefore they could learn from each other. In conversation with Claire Parnet, Deleuze described his way of working with Guattari as a ‘pick-up’ method, but then qualifies it by saying ‘method’ is not the right word and suggests ‘double-theft’ and ‘a-parallel evolution’ as perhaps better alternatives. (Deleuze and Parnet 2002: 18)
It started off with letters. And then we began to meet from time to time to listen to what the other had to say. It was great fun. But it could be really tedious too. One of us always talked too much. Often one of us would put forward some notion, and the other just didn't see it, wouldn't be able to make anything of it until months later, in a different context. … And then we wrote a lot. Félix sees writing as a schizoid flow drawing in all sorts of things. I’m interested in the way a page of writing flies off in all directions and at the same time closes right up on itself like an egg. And in the reticences, the resonances, the lurches, and all the larvae you can find in a book. Then we really started writing together, it wasn’t a problem. We took turns at rewriting things.
(Deleuze 1995: 14)- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Deleuze and History , pp. 206 - 224Publisher: Edinburgh University PressPrint publication year: 2009