Deleuze contra Derrida

[Andrew Dinn]

Dan O`Hara writes:

>     If we adopt a Derridean reading of Pynchon to interpret the "a-
> and" (which is how this debate started, I believe), we`ve got to take 
> on board the semantic dynamic inherent in his notion of difference. 
> What we end up with is an exponential tendency toward a 
> transcendental signified, given that the Derridean conjunction is 
> always disjunctively syllogistic, therefore always hierarchical and 
> so always straining towards the thin end of the wedge of signifieds. 
> Derrida is shaped like a skewed triangle. I`d remind you of Andrew 
> Dinn`s comment that "Slothrop in paranoid mode starts assembling 
> conjunctions"; if we read all those conjunctions through this 
> Derridean prism, paranoia ceases to be paranoia and schizoid thought 
> becomes a plane of metaphysical union.

In fact paranoia stops being paranoia and starts being `science'
according to many conventional philosophers of the the subject. This
is why `Gravity's Rainbow' gets such a warm reaction from many who are
science literate. It cuts close to the bone of a fundamental
contention of current scientific methodology - that science concerns
itself solely with the *convergence* of theoretical predictive models
based on empirical measurement towards better and better accounts of
an unknown, transcendent reality. Every `and' is another measurement
assimilated, another set of alternatives excluded, another step nearer
the asymptote. It's no accident that Mexico cannot get the scientists
to understand the notion of the `random variable', which is neither
random nor variable, nor that he only truly succumbs (succeeds?) to
both randomness and variability when he joins the Counterforce.

> One more point, to comfort those who are horrified at the terribly 
> hip crowd of Deleuzians (and who perhaps feel a little left out?): 
> take Frank Zappa`s words to heart - "To all the cute people in the 
> world, maybe you`re beautiful, well, there`s more of us ugly 
> motherfuckers than you, ha!"

I'll console myself with the thought that TRP cites D&G as authors of
`The Italian Wedding Fake Book'. If that's an endorsement then I'll
eat my copy of Anti-Oedipus.


Andrew Dinn
-----------
there is no map / and a compass / wouldn't help at all