1) Style and immanence becoming
Deleuze insists the world is complicated, open and constantly changing. Speaking and writing keep becoming and changing with life, they are not just forms of representation out of life. Our relationship to the world, a “plane of immanence” that is “mobility, flux, becoming and changing” beginning, is dynamic. For example, “The world is transformed and affected by our writing, which is transformed by our perception of the world”. (Colebrook C 2002, p52?
“The world is a becoming, we should not think of it as an object, a simple representation by a separate subject.” The world is passively waiting to be represented by a viewing subject is a mistake. “The distinction between mind and world, words and things, inside and outside, subjects and objects, the virtual and the actual or the representations and the world depend on specific events.” Take a virtual totality plane as a whole, “each event of actualization creates an inside and an outside.” (Colebrook C 2002, p53) For instance, DNA is a virtual potential takes a number of forms that effect each actual life. The perception of the world is created by certain events between inside and outside.
2) The fold
It is possible that “human life is actualized from the virtual potential in DNA”. Being in the plane of life not only react or perceive, but also response and inflect. There is no actual or pre-given world before been perceived or represented virtually. Deleuze consider the “fold” as the creation of worlds. We should not distinguish perceiver and perceiced. “There is an infinity of folds. There is one virtual whole of being instead of two types of being.” Infinity of perceptions, worlds and “souls” are actualized from different folds, for example, “the animal has a different outside world from the human.” (Colebrook C 2002, p54) Becoming is open and eternal. Soul forms a “theater” that is produced by certain events of perceiving, which “has its own world”, while matter “is produced by being fixed” in contrast. However, “soul and matter are not two types of being” (Colebrook C 2002, p56), they are within being but different in folds, which not only affect matter but also “produce a form of expression” (Deleuze 1993, pp.34-5).
3) Immanence and virtual difference
“Immanence is a way of connecting new ideas and possibilities for thinking.” (Colebrook C 2002, p57) Becomings are potentials and possibilities and power of life that don’t have an end or goal. “Life is change itself”, like gene or water in the flow of life, and “there are multiplicities of folds and flows”.
An extensive multiplicity is changing in quantity without identity changing. Like you add more red objects into a set of red objects. But an intensive multiplicity is altered by a dynamic force, like you change amount or speed of light that makes us no longer seeing red. Another example is the identity of British. Political grouping of British is by determined units, it’s an extensive multiplicity and a “subjugated group”. But if we count “asylum seekers” into British, we changed the “standard of Britishness that is English-speaking and white”. (Colebrook C 2002, p60) It’s an intensive multiplicity and a “subject group”.
5) Subject group/ subjugated group
“Subjugated groups are governed by an identity of units”, (Colebrook C 2002, p60) to enter being British, you need certain conditions. What’s nationalism? Today (2002), Australia is having the republican movement, Australians are trying to form “their own identity and character that allows them to call themselves ‘Australian'”.
Subject groups, like minority groups, “are constantly in transformation which are not governed by an identity” (Colebrook C 2002, p61). Women are in the majority of population but thought as minority because they are not “recognized by the dominant standard of ‘man'” (Colebrook C 2002, p61). Standards of human are “rational, moral or social”, otherwise are as “inhuman”.
There are two modes of nationalist political claims, majoritarian and minoritarian” (Colebrook C 2002, p61). Take indigenous??? Australians as a subjugated group, they could have the same rights like voting and own land as all Australians and be added into the population. But take the movement as a subject group, they have different histories and cultures. “The difference between majorities and minorities is the mode of quantity” (Colebrook C 2002, p62). The Aboriginal Australians, which is a new force, occur could change the concept of Australians by “question western democratic notion and understanding of land as property” (Colebrook C 2002, p62).
Majority- extensive multiplicity- subjugated group
Minority- intensive multiplicity- subject group
6) Becoming minoritarian
“Politics were based on underlying goal or principle. A majority always presents itself as representative in general” (Colebrook C 2002, p63). But the force of minority creates new distinctions, new people. “The world consists of different forces” (Colebrook C 2002, p63). Deleuze and Guattari consider the political process as a ” ‘body without organs’, that is added like a new, really distinct part” (Deleuze & Guattari 1983, p.327). We should “think difference itself to liberate thinking from its moral foundations” (Colebrook C 2002, p64).
Becoming does not extend along one line. There are thousands of different durations. Taking just one line of the west, western cultures see “other cultures as ‘developing’, ‘post-colonial’ or ‘pre-industrial’.” But actually, “capitalism intersects and overlaps with other lines of time”. Every beings have their own pace and impermanence. “A molecule operates at a different speed” (Colebrook C 2002, p65). Deleuze thinks that we may be “exposed to another logic of individuation and invention, be capable to free from an ‘original’ nature, contract, or law we must imitate or obey” (Rajchman 2000, p111).
Desire and the fold are two key concepts of Deleuze because he thinks life creates more complicated folds, “is always active and creative. Desire is the power of change, life begins from flows of becoming or desire.” “Common sense and ordinary language have already divided the world into subject and object, noun and verb, inner experience and outside world, which is a mistake” that we should against (Colebrook C 2002, p67). “Philosophy, art and science” should not consider a single center but a flow of differences.
8) Against representation
“Kill metaphor” (Deleuze & Guattari 1986, p70). Metaphor is an image or visualization we use to represent the outside world. Instead of metaphor as a support of thinking and philosophy, we should use metamorphosis since the world is interactive by responding events and images. For example, philosophers always link time to “a line, a river or a series of points, and imagine mind as a camera, mirror or window.” But we should abandon this because “reality itself is infinite and inhuman imaging” (Colebrook C 2002, p68). Imaging is beyond common language and representation that we should breakthrough our habitually reflection. We should against representation in the open, dynamic and constantly changing world.
1983, Nietzsche and Philosophy, trans. Hugh Tomlinson, Athlone, London
1986, Cinema 1: The Movement-Image, trans. Hugh Tomlinson and Barbara Habberjam, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis
1993, The Fold: Leibniz and the Baroque, trans. Tom Conley, Athlone
Rajchman, John, 2000, The Deleuze Connections, MIT Press, Cambridge,
Colebrook, C, 2002, Understanding Deleuze. Australia: Allen & Unwin.