That identity not be first, that it exist as a principle but as a second principle, as a principle become; that it revolve around the Different: such would be the nature of a Copernican revolution which opens up the possibility of difference having its own concept, rather than being maintained under the domination of a concept in general already understood as identical. (DR 41)
From Plato (DR 59-63) to Heidegger (DR 64-6), Deleuze argues, difference has not been accepted on its own, but only after being understood with reference to self-identical objects, which makes difference a difference between. He attempts in this book to reverse this situation, and to understand difference-in-itself.
Unity, Deleuze tells us, must be understood as a secondary operation (DR 41) under which difference is pressed into forms. The prominent philosophical notion he offers for such unity is time (see (4)(c) below), but later, in Anti-Oedipus, Deleuze and Guattari offer a political ontology that shows how this process of becoming is fixed into unitary formulations.
The dialectic, Deleuze tells us, seems to operate with extreme differences alone, even so far as acknowledging them as the motor of history. Formed of two opposite terms, such as being and non-being, the dialectic operates by synthesising them into a new third term that preserves and overcomes the earlier opposition. Deleuze argues that this is a dead end which makes,
identity the sufficient condition for difference to exist and be thought. It is only in relation to the identical, as a function of the identical, that contradiction is the greatest difference. The intoxication and giddiness are feigned, the obscure is already clarified from the outset. Nothing shows this more than the insipid monocentrality of the circles in the Hegelian dialectic. (DR 263)
History progresses not by negation and the negation of negation, but by deciding problems and affirming differences. It is no less bloody and cruel as a result. Only the shadows of history live by negation . . . (DR 268)
The first is time as a circle. Circular time is mythical and seasonal time, the repetition of the same after time has passed through its cardinal points. These points may be simple natural repetitions, like the sun rising daily, the movement of summer to spring, or the elements of tragedy, which Deleuze suggests operate cyclically. There is a sense of both destiny and theology in the concept of time as a circle, as a succession of instants which are governed by an external law.
When time is considered in this fashion, Deleuze argues (DR 70-9), repetition is solely concerned with habit. The subject experiences the passing of moments cyclically (the sun will come up every morning), and contracts habits which make sense of time as a continually living present. Habit is thus the passive synthesis of moments that creates a subject.
Deleuze insists that both of these models of time press repetition into the service of the identical, and make it a secondary process with regards to time. The final model of time that Deleuze proposes attempts to make repetition itself the form of time.
In order to do this, Deleuze relates the concepts of difference and repetition to each other. If difference is the essence of that which exists, constituting beings as disparates, then neither of the first two models of time does justice to them, insisting as they do on the possibility and even necessity of synthesising differences into identities. It is only when beings are repeated as something other that their disparateness is revealed. Consequently, repetition cannot be understood as a repetition of the same, and becomes liberated from subjugation under the demands of traditional philosophy.
To give body to the conception of repetition as the pure form of time, Deleuze turns to the Nietzschean concept of the eternal return. This difficult concept is always given a forceful and careful qualification by Deleuze whenever he writes about it (eg. DR 6;41; 242; PI 88-9; NP 94-100): that it must not be considered as the movement of a cycle, as the return of the identical. As a form of time, the eternal return is not the circle of habit, even on the cosmic level. This would only allow the return of something that already existed, of the same, and would result again in the suppression of difference through an inadequate concept of repetition.
crush thought under an image which is that of the Same and the Similar in representation, but profoundly betrays what it means to think and alienates the two powers of difference and repetition, of philosophical commencement and recommencement. (DR167)
Finally, Deleuze draws on the difference between Western, representational models of vision, and the haptic style of Egyptian art, in which he sees a development of a mode of writing/drawing which resists being hypostased into the content/form duality common to philosophical understandings of art.
8/1/2000 MOJO MAGAZINE Andrew Cardeen Windsor for the Derby Difference and Repetition - Review There's no reason to overlook the third lp from texas post-rockers windsor for the derby. \"difference and repetition\" is their first for ex-swans leader michael gira's young god label and continues on the gentle trajectory of their earlier work with a soothing mix of repeated phrases, hushed whispers, and organic ambience. think eno, tortoise, and late '60's pink floyd.\"
In the spirit of Gilles Deleuze, who sought to interrogate the presuppositions of the ideas and concepts we assume as a function of our education and social existence, this essay uses poetic prose to reflect upon nine quotations from Difference and Repetition as they are relevant to questions of merit and distinction. Like Deleuze, the author assumes that allusive and even metaphysical prose employing neologisms and creative (re)interpretation of language can be especially helpful when critiquing and seeking to understand repetition, tradition, and hierarchies that have been locked in place by disciplined styles of expression.
Several themes are common to both sets of works. Some pieces explore concepts of the human body and its frailties, or the importance of human touch in the creative process. Others challenge the conformity and standardization that may be imposed by government, religious ritual, or mass culture. The peculiarities of communication and the manipulative power of language are another recurring motif. Finally, a number of works play with the nature of copies, exploring the aesthetics and technology of difference within replication.
In naming drawings of complex common objects, unpracticed naming times increase with rotation away from the upright, but this orientation effect is attenuated with practice. In principle, attenuation could result from learning to extract orientation-invariant information or from learning view-specific representations at the trained orientations. We contrasted these approaches by examining repetition prirrdng for prime-target pairs presented on successive trials in either the same orientation (horse at 51 primes horse at 51) or a different orientation (horse at 154 primes horse at 51), for two subgroups of subjects. One subgroup showed no orientation effect, even when unpracticed, and a correspondingly high generalization of priming across different views. The other subgroup initially showed high sensitivity to misorientation and little priming across orientations but, with sufficient practice, came to show no orientation effect and complete generalization of priming. Thus, some subjects always used orientation-invariant procedures, whereas others learned to do so.
Commenting on the South African predicament in a recent opinion piece in The Mail and Guardian, Mbembe wrote: \"A planetary recoding of situations of misery, debt and enforced idleness is underway. Today, black people are still paying the price of yesterday's racial discounts, without which white privilege would have been but a mirage. The next decade will see increasing conflict between market forces and democracy, between the rule of property and the rule of the poor. The capacity of the South African State to mediate between the rights of the propertyless and the requirements of capital accumulation will be severely tested\". In this lecture, Mbembe will reflect on the current South African political moment. He will also assess the crisis of culture which afflicts South Africa's democracy and the extent to which contemporary struggles for emancipation truly transcend the law of repetition which Frantz Fanon foresaw as the biggest threat to difference and newness. Achille MBEMBE is a Research Professor in History and Politics at WiSER and a Visiting Professor in the Romance Studies Department and The Franklin Humanities Institute at Duke University. He is a co-Convenor of The Johannesburg Workshop in Theory and Criticism (JWTC) and the Editor of the digital cultural magazine The Johannesburg Salon. He is the author of numerous books in French and is mostly known in the English-speaking world for his classic, On the Postcolony (Bil, Venter/Altron Award, 2005). His latest book, Sortir de la grande nuit (Editions La Decouverte, Paris, 2010) has sold more than 10,000 copies and will be published by Columbia University Press in 2013.
Hindus conceive simultaneously of their gods as one and as many. While it is generally acknowledged that the god Shiva, for instance, is a singular concept that transcends human understanding, Shiva is nevertheless emplaced and made manifest in a multitude of temples in each of which he has a distinct identity and story. Worshippers relate intimately to an emplaced god, but this does not prevent their seeking out the god in other places and other forms. This paper seeks to explore the simultaneous transcendence and immanence, singularity and multiplicity of the gods through the Deleuzian concepts of difference and repetition and connection and forgetting. It brings Deleuze in conversation with empirical research in contemporary south India. 59ce067264