Rodrigo Paramo

HUSL 6317

Politics (1977)
Gilles Deleuze & Claire Parnet

As an assemblage, a book has only itself, in connection with other assemblages and in relation to other bodies without
organs. We will never ask what a book means, as signified or signifier; we will not look for anything to understand in it. We
will ask what it functions with, in connection with what other things it does or does not transmit intensities, in which other
multiplicities its own are inserted and metamorphosed, and with what bodies without organs it makes its own converge.
A book exists only through the outside and on the outside. A book itself is a little machine (D&G, 1988: 4).

Deleuze and Parnet outline a framing of individuals and groups as composed of a series of lines. There
are three types of lines: molar, molecular, and lines of flight. The center point of Deleuze (and frequent
collaborator Felix Guattari)s political project is to study those lines (from here, D&G). There are many names for
their methodology schizo-analysis, micropolitics, pragmatism, diagrammatics, rhizomatics, cartography.
F. Scott Fitzgerald outlined a similar linear model in his piece The Crack-Up: for Fitzgerald, life moves at
several speeds along lines segmented similarly to D&G. The relationship Fitzgerald highlights between two primary
lines is that when life on the first line is going well, the second one begins to fragment; alternatively, we improve
life on the first line when cracks begin to form on the second. Either reading is correct and highlights the
interconnectedness of life along both lines. Deleuze highlights Fitzgeralds model as similar to Kierkegaards work,
and, more centrally, Fernand Delignys cartography which traces literal lines to convey a life-cycle.
Deleuze begins here to outline the specifics of lines. Molar lines have three characteristics: 1) segments on
molar lines stem from binary machines that dichotomize life it is not a question of only a or b (when someone
doesnt fit either, a new in-between category is created), 2) segments imply power set-ups (what Deleuze terms
code-territory complex[es]) that allow the state to homogenize difference*, 3) all these lines exist on a plane of
organization, or of transcendence in opposition to this, Deleuze proposes a plane of consistence, or
immanence where becoming occurs. Molecular lines exist on this second plane, which works to get away from
previous formulations of transcendence. There is not a dualism that exists between the planes; instead, there is a
need to move away from these dualistic structures towards a recognition of the multiplicity of dimensions, lines,
etc.
In order to begin to conceptualize territorialisation, Deleuze proposes understanding the human as a
deterritorialized animal de/re-territorialisation occur simultaneously and are constitutive of the fields they occur
within. Lines of flight are similarly constitutive, as representative of every potential becoming for a society - they
outline the social realm within which becoming occurs. Attempting to trace each of the lines that Deleuze has
outlined is effectively highlighted as an impossible task, in part because the lines themselves are consistently
becoming. It is difficult to know which lines are which and how they relate to one another. It is not enough to trace
the lines we can encounter the same dangers there (namely, the Oedipus at the heart of Deleuzes critique of
psychoanalysis), manifested in a micro-fascism that makes negative consequences possible from all directions.
This recognition that danger is present on the first two lines makes the line of flight seem like an appealing
alternative. Yet, Deleuze concludes that one cannot merely trace a line of flight as that is similarly risky. He further
highlights war and the war machine as a threat to bodies the question of a positive praxis is thus simple for him:
Which are your lines, as an individual or group, and what are their dangers? Which are your rigid segments what
would be the dangers if we got rid of [these] too quickly Which are your supple lines and what do they contain
a growing micro-fascism? Which are your lines of flight, are they still viable? (184). There is no general answer to
these questions bodies exist in a radically new position which contains all potentialities and has the possibility for
a new type of revolution.
Key Terms:

Abstract Machine: a conceptual machine the state invokes in order to organize dominance and lead to the
homogenization of society; examples provided include different currency systems, and Greek geometry.

Becoming: where Western politics begins from assuming static positions of being, Deleuze believes the
world is contingent and lacking fixed conceptions of being thinking must be mobile and shift away from
traditional Western philosophy.

Deterritorialisation: territorialisation is the forming of connections between bodies, societies, individuals,

etc; deterritorialisation is always occurring simultaneously. This is because the connections that occur and
allow for something to become what it is necessarily also allow for something to become what it is not. An
absolute deterriotiralisation is a liberation from connections and only ever an imagined ideal though at
first this seems to be the Deleuzian alternative, he concludes it is impossible.

Line of Flight: the third type of line Deleuze and Parnet highlight, this traces potentialities that exist;
possible permutations of concepts/becomings etc. When we create a strict definition of something, we
open up lines of flight that trace every other potential definition of that thing

Microfascism: the internalized desire to impose ones rules on others; individuals develop their own rules
and practices that drive everyday life, and feel a drive to force society to follow the same rules this is what
escalates to violence as a consequence of the problems Deleuze diagnoses

Micropolitics: This is what Deleuze names his praxis: for him, the private and the public are synonymous
and every political action engages with the problems of everyday life. There is no distinction/dualism
between local and global problems, which necessitates a recognition of immanence as all-encompassing

Molar forces: macro structures and tendencies (lines) which Deleuze is largely skeptical of; these are
typically related to state and institutional apparatuses which structure everyday life. Segmented rigidly,
carving up life into dualistic categories

Molecular forces: temporary, small scale and loose particularities (becomings). Not necessarily more
intimate/personal, they trace small modifications.

Plane of consistence (immanence): in opposition to transcendence, which Deleuze highlights as the

starting point of Western thought, immanence argues there is nothing outside of becoming there is no
God/transcendental subject for the world to strive toward/elevate oneself to

Plane of organization (transcendence): conventional philosophy what is understood as outside of

consciousness/experience; transcendence strives for vertical travel which leads to creation of hierarchies
etc.

References:
Colebrook, Claire. Gilles Deleuze. New York: Routledge, 2002. Print.
Colebrook, Claire. Understanding Deleuze. Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin, 2002. Print.
"Gilles Deleuze." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford University, 25 September 2012. Web. 23 January
2016.
Malins, Peta. "Machinic assemblages: Deleuze, Guattari and an ethico-aesthetics of drug use." Janus Head 7.1
(2004): 84-104.