Deleuze and Space [Chapter 12]

8/11/2019 Deleuze and Space [Chapter 12]

1/7

206

Deleuze

ond

Spoce

Deleuze,

G.

(1993).

Tbe Fold:

Leibniz and

the Baroque,

rrans. T.

Conley,

London:

Athlone

Press.

Del_euze,

.

(1'994),Di fference

ntl

Repeti t ion,trans.

.patton,

New

york:

columbia

University

Press.

Deleuze,

G.

(1995),

Negotiat ions:

1972-1990,

rrans.

M.

Joughin,

New

york:

Columbia

University

Press.

Deleuze,

G. and

Guatrari,

F.

(1983),

Anti-oedipus:

capitalism

and

scbizophrenia,

trans.

R. Hurley,

M.

Seem nd

H. R. Lane,

Minneapol is:

universi ty

of Minnesota

Press.

Deleuze,

G.

and

Guatari, F.

(1987),

A

Tbousand

plateaus:

Ca\italisn

and

s,chizopbrenia,

rans.

B. Massumi,

Minneapol is:

University

of Minnesora

press.

Deleuze,G. and Guartar i ,F. (1994\,What is Phi losophy?,ians. H. Tomlinsonan d

G. Burchill,

London:

Verso.

Derr ida,

].

0974],,

Of Grammatology,

trans.

G. C.

Spivak, Bal t imore:

Johns

Hopkins

University Press.

Derr ida,I.

(1981),

Dissemination,

rans.B.

Johnson,

hicago:

University

of chicago

Press.

Derrida,

J.

11982),

Margins

of Pbilosophy,

rrans.

A. Bass,

Sussex:

Harvesrer

press.

Derrida,

].

0989),

Edmund Husserl's

Origin

of Geontetry:

An Introduction,

uans.

J.

P.

Leavey

Jr,

Lincoln:

University

of Nebraska

Press.

Foucault,

M.

(19701,The

Order

of Things,

London:

Tavistock

press.

Foucault,

M.

(2001),

Space,

Knowledge

and Power, '

n

J.

D. Faubion

(ed,.) ,

otuer:

Essential

Mor lzs

of

Foucault1954-1984,

rans.

R.

Hurley

et. al . .

Harmondsworth:

Pengrr in,

p.449-64.

Husserl,

E.

(1970),

The

crisis

of the European

Sciences

and

Transcendental

Phenomenology,

rans. D.

Carr,

Evanston:

Northwestern

Universitv

press.

Heidegger,M. (1967), Wbat is a Thing?, trans.'W. B. Barron -J, and V. Deutsch,

Lanham:

University

Press

f America.

Tschumi,

B.

\1987),

cin|gramme

Folie: Le

Parc

de la villette,

princeron:

princeton

Architectural

Press.

Wigley,

M.

(1993),

'fhe

Architecture

of Deconstruction,

Cambridge:

MIT

press.

Notes

1.

Accordingly,

there

is

a

quantitative

distinction

among

beings

that allows

for

intrinsic

di fference.

l l these

umerically

di fferent nstinces

of

whit. are

stil l

o/

whiteness,a ower

to di f fer

hat s essential

nd can

be seen s eal ly

distrnct

nl v

because

t

expresses

tself

over

and over

again.

Space

as extensitn

allows

for

'extrinsic

individuation'

or the

difference

of

this

ron

thatl

but

intensive

sDace

s

intensive

s

ust

he

power

of

essenrial

i f ferences

o express

hemselves.

o reDeat

themselves

n

al l the i r

d i f ference

nd

rhereby

srahl i s t rone

xprcss ivelane: '

Only

a quantitative

distinction

of beings

is consisrent

with

the

qualitative

ident i ty

of rhe

absolure.

nd rh is quanri rar i ve

is t inc t ion

s

no

mereappear -

ance,

but an

internal

difference,

a difference

of

intensity.

So

that

each hnite

being

rnust

be

said to express

he

absolute,

according,

that is,

to the degree

of

its

power.

Individuation

is, in Spinoza,

neither

qualitative

nor

extrinsic,

but

quantitative

and intrinsic,

intensive.

(Deleuze

19922

197\

2. In

Anti-oedipus

(1.983),

Deleuze

and Guattari

argue

rhat

desire

s aiways revo-

lut ionary.

Desire

s nor

the

desire or this

or

thar ost

obiect.

or

this or that

suo-

pos_edly

atural

need.Desire

s

he

power

for life

to

act, where

action,

.ou.rn.nt

and

striving

are not

determined

n

advance

by any

proper

end

or intrinsic

rela-

t ion

(Deleuze

nd

Guartar i

1983:377\.

Chopter

2

The

Desert

slond

Tom

Conley

One

of

Gilles

Deleuze's trrliest

ieces

f writing could

be

magined s a

mrrnuscript

hat its author,a shipwrecked

ailorhavingwashed p on a

deserted

sland,wrote

and il lustratedwith a map on a

piece

of

paper,

scrolled

ightly

nto a

coil,

and

hen

pushed

own the

neck

of a

bottlehe

corked

and

tossed nto the ocean.But unlike he

marooned

oul on the

beach

iving

n

the

hope

hat

a crew aboarda

passing

hip

might

ind the

bottle

bobbing

n thewaves, ead hewords and ook

at

the

map n

order

to

change he courseof their

voyage, etrieve

he

forlorn author

and

bringhim back o thehavenof a mainland, he solatedman encrypts is

w


2/7

2Og

Deleuze

nd Spoce

a sense

f

its

mport

n

thework

at large.

s

he

articlea

piece

f

juvenilia

in

which

many

of

the themes

f the

later

work find

imperfect

but

jew-

elled

expression?

s

it

a miniature

combray

in

a copious

and moving

architecture

of writing,

ending

wrth

critique

et cliniqwe

n

1993,

thit

bears

esemblance

n

volume

and force

o

proust s

A

la recherch|

du

temps

perdu?

Has it

remained,

before t

appeared

n print,

a

,empty

square n

a checkerboard

hat

allowed

an

nfinitepermutation

nd vari-

ation in

the

creative

drive in

the philosopher s

work

in general?

Affirmative

esponses

o these

uestions

ould

be ikely

and

eassuringly

welcome, ut only f the earlywritingswerenot taken o determine nd

predict

what

would

be hought,

n

the

philosopher s

areer,

o follow

or

to evolve

from

the first

writings. Reflective

space

would need

to

be

retained

or

a

position

rom

which t

could

be

argued

hat he

early

work

is

as

genuine

and

as complex

as the later

material,

and that in

sum

it

would

be useless

o

apply

a model

of

phases

of

development

r

.evolu-

tion in Deleuze s

riting

as

might

the specialist

n

embryology.

A

positive

nswer

o the

questions

ould n greater

ikelihood

erve

o

inform

the

reader

of Deleuze s

asting

dentification

with issues

f space

andgeography.

t is n

this

sense

hat

he

paragraphs

hat ollow

will

take

up a reading

of Deleuze s

Desert

Island .

The philosopherwhom Alain Badiouhas ightly calledan ontologisr

is

an adept

of the

science

f

being nsofar

as

he

s

a

geographer

nd a

phi-

losopher

f space

see

Badiou

1997).

The

beginnings

f

the maginative

spatial

ontology

hat will

assume

ther

and

often

prorean

forms

are

coordinated

and

plotted

with

commensurate

omplexity

n

this

early

article. o

see ow

they

are

and n

which

directions

hey

move

will

be he

concern

f the

paragraphs

hat

follow.

As

always

with

Deleuze,

he sland

s

something

hat s

hought,

some-

thing

created

y virtue

of being

elected,

lassified

nd

hus

provisionally

isolated

or

pigeonholed.

eflection

n the

causes

f

the

island

s what

prompts

he philosopher

o

discover

hat

the act

of selecion

and sola-

tion

constitutes

ot

an instance

f

creation

but

of re-creation.

he

dis,

coveryof the originaryand founding

world

that

would

be

he

piece

of

land

surrounded

y warer

s

an effecr

f

a

variat ion

nd

a repeti t ion.

he

island

s ound

within

the

process

hat makes

t liable

o be

conremplated

in

the first place.

t is from

its

inaugurarion

as both iden tity

and

differ-

ence hat

one

critic

callshis

own caribbean

world

that

of a

repearing

island .

n

any

given

ocale

he sland

would

be

a

reiteration

makingpos-

sible

what

we imagine

o be

he opographies

f our

world

and our lives

(see

Benitez-Rojo

996).

Deleuze s

ssay

oes

not

broach

subjectivity

n

terms

of the

experience

f local

or

sentient

pace,

ut it

does

chart

a

The

Desertslond

2O9

rnult i-faceted

or

mult i-layered

ground

plan of

the

relat ion

of sensation

and

imaginat ion

to locat ion. l

It

shows that

our

imaginat ion

tends

to

nrake

space

antamount to

being

nsofar as

being can only be

thought

of

in

terms

of becoming,

n other

words, within the f loq force

and

vital i ty

ot

repet i t ion

and

recreat ion.

It

suff ices

o

review the essay o discern ts inherent

cartography

and

implicat ions

for what concerns

Deleuze

and space. t

begins

with

a

quad-

rant

defined

by two species

f island and

two ways

-

one

basedon

science

and

the

other

on the imagination

-

of comprehending

them.

Sfhat

scien-

t i f ic

geographers

call continental islands

are

accidental

(and

possibly

accidentdes,

with anfractuosit ies seen as

jagged

edges)

or

derived

(having

been separated

rom

a riue or shore). They

are born

of a

disar-

t iculat ion,

of an erosion, of a

fracture ,

and

they are survivors

of the

swallowing

up or the

engulf ing

of what used to retain

them .2 By

con-

trast)

oceanic

islands

are

originary,

essential slands:

sometimes they

are

formed

by

corals, they

offer us a veritable organism

-

sometimes

hey

surge

up from under the sea, hey

bring to the open air a rnovement

from

the

lower depths; some emerge slowlS

others disappear and come

back,

they

can t be annexed

(Deleuze

2002:11). The

sentences ith which

the

geographical

definit ions are crafted betray an insular

and unsett l ing

style.They are open-ended, n a loose syntax, in which the verbal com-

ponents

are

effect ively

isolated from

each other. They

appear almost

incontinent

or of such

an

oral

texture that they make the ear magine the

rvords

in

their spoken delivery where,

as such, sentences o not exist;

where,

in

other words, a f low

of

expression

prevails,

and where,

inas-

rnuch

as

one descript ive s added to another,

clauses,

ike

waves,

follow

and

fold

upon and over each other.

The

tenor

of the descript ion of the two kinds

of

island

complicates

he

opposit ion

of the continental to the oceanic

species.

t is

at once scien-

rific

and mythic. The

derived

islands are brought forward

before

their

originary

counterparts are defined. f they withstand

-

or,

in

the

highly

organic

idiolect

that makes their seemingly norganic matter resemble

living

flesh

-

they

survive

being eaten or

swallowed by the continents

that

had formerly

retained

or

kept them

under their

jurisdict ion.

The

drif t

of Deleuze s sentence

suggests

holds

that the derived islands

had

l >een

e

facto

engulfed,

under the dominion of land,

before they

escaped

the

clutches

of the continent. By a short stretch

of the

imagination the

clerived

slands

can be f igured as sailors

who survive, both on and ds

the

isiands

where they are. They

are the

fruits

of the shipwreck of a conti-

nental

vessel

or a

mutiny

that separated hem from

the

tyranny

of

conti-

nental

land. The

gist

of Deleuze sFrench

suggests he

narrat ive

of

an


3/7

Deleuze

nd

Spoce

upheaval

or

a founding

separation

hat,

paradoxicaty,

defines

heir

orig-

inarity:

[Ellles

sont

s6par6es

'un

.orrri.r.rrr,

ries

,une

d6sarticulation,

d'une

6rosion,

'une

racture,

tt.,

,*ulrr"nt

i

l,engloutissement

e

cequ i

les

erenait'

They

are

separated

rom

a

conrinent,

orn

of

a

disarticula_

tion,

of

an

erosion,,

f

a

f.actur",

th.f

survive

being

swallowed

up

by

what

rerained

hem).

That

s

why

it

seems

rrange

hat

oceanic

slands

would

be

called

orig-

inary,

essential',

n

view

of

the

creatiue

upture

hat

formed

heir

deriva_

tive

coequals.

n

the

style

of

the

description

hese

sland,

;i;

be

erranr,

mercurial beings' ricksrersperhaps,Lvenchaprinesque ;;;, that

pop

our

of

and

disappear

nro

th"

o.."r,

ihut

*ouri.r,gurf

,t

"-.

it

.y

,urg.

out

of

what

elsewhere

eleuze

alls

an

originary,

iorld

oiio*.,

depths

or'bas-fonds'.3

hey

cannot

be

colonised

r

,annexed,

to

the

continent.

They

could

be

gured

possibly

s

craters

f

volcanoes

hat

draw

eremen-

tal

force

rom

the

earth

nto

tir.

ut-orphere.

They

might

also

be

counte_

nanced

as

great

accretiorrs

of

calciurn

that

coral

?.r"*0""

has

so

accumulated

n

submarine

laces

hat

hey

have

become

eefs

nd

ndeed

patches

of

terra

firma.

In

all

events

he

opposition

between

he

wo

kinds

enabres

ereuze

o

mobilise

nherited

Aristotelian

world-pictures

or

,t

.

purpo*

of

creat_

ing

a

geography

of

force

and

nrensity:

These

two r.ira, o]'iri-ds, orig-inaryor continentar,

ttest

o

a

profound

opposition

between

he

ocean

and

the

earth''

In

this

conrext

he

historiartof

g.ogr"prry

*."rr,

that

in

many

diagrams

f

the

celestial

pheres

he

world

s

at

the

crux

of

ten

con_

cenrric

circles

hat

describe,

frei

earth

and

water

ar,h;:;;;;

and

ire,

and

hen

he

unar

and

planetary

pheres.a

n

these

onfigurations

lobe

is

seen

n

dark

and

ighipatches

hat

a.pi.t

aqueous

nd

elluric

egions

roughly

comprising

a

sum

of

oceans

,rd

continents.

o

this

inherited

image

Deleuze

dds,

however,

har

,th.

.1"_.n,,

g.rr.r"ll;

J.t.rt

.u.h

other,

he

one

s

horrible

to

the

othe.

r"

"ri

this,

rrothing

very

reassuring,.

Whar

had

been

lux.and.flo1v,

earing

"irn.rr

ro

,yi,rrn"rrf

"na

.o__

plementarities

f

all

things

n

God's

r."",iorr,

s

urned

nro

war

and

con_

flict in a way hat renewsa se seof geographical dventure

nown

to

the

Renaissance'

momnt

when-

"itnt]

beginnings

are

recreated

and

rehearsed'

The

two

elemenrs

f

the

.rr.,'r.nt"ry

region,

held

within

the

circles

of

air

and

fire,

are

earth

and

warer.

They

are

f;ld.d

,for,

.".h

other

and

are

offered

to

the

eye

as

.rh.

diu.rr.

layers

of

the

egg

or

the

onion' (Broc

1980:

6gff').

Aibertus

Magnus'

providentiar

ipott.ri,

argued.that

n

the

beginning

he

"nrth

*"

covered

with

warer,

but

that

God

eft

a

part

of

the

earth

uncou.r.d

,o

nllo*

man

and

animals

o

live.

The

scientific

ounterpart

o

the

theological

explanation

was

based

on

The

Deserf

slond 211

the

perception hat certain

of the circles

were of

dif ferent axes,

such that

earthen

circumference,

although

inscribed

in the

aqueous surrottnd,

exceeded

ts container at the North

Pole. Copernicus

atif ied

he

point

by ,

'showing

that there do

not

exist

two dist inct spheres,

ne of earth

and

th e

other

of

water that

"penetrated each other"', but that in their

place

is

a

single

errestrial

sphere

whose depressed urfaces re

he

basins

of the

seas.-5

Theories

of the balance

and

flow

of

water moving about masses

f

land,

rhanks

o

the speculat ion

hat

there

existed

an

austral

continent nhabited

by

the

Antipodes,

were defined

in new

terms of a

general

geography

that

included:

sland,

peninsula,

cap,

isthmus, and

continent.6The

seasan d

rivers

of

the earth were

hought to

be

n

a dynamic

process)

ue o

a

marvel

of

nature

by

which

oceaniccurrents descend rom certain

places

o

others,

and

hat

as

a result

and

a verif icat ion

of the

hypothesis ivers

both

f low into

the

sea

and

the

sea

eventually

and by often strange t ineraries) nto rivers.

Yet

speculat ion

among

cosmographers

was so

varied

that

there

reigned

as

rruch

confl ict

in the attributed causes

of the

places

and

movements

of

masses

f water and land

as he

plirces

nd movements

hemselves.

Deleuze vital ises

nherited

cosmography when

he personif ies

he

land

:rncl

he sea.

n

his

polemology

these

contrary bodies are mutual

enemies

who use

strategies

o

win

over each

other.

The

sea hat covers much of

the eirrth,

'takes

advantage of the slightest sinking of the highest struc-

tures'

of the

land

itself ,

while the earth that l ies under

the seacan terror-

ise

ts

adversary by cutt ing through

and

renting its

aqueous surface. As

a

consequence

no inherited explanation of

the character of the

planet

goes

without

confl ict and struggle. t fol lows,

too,

that

the

'car.rses'

an d

'reasons'

for

islands

are themselvesat war

with

each

other, and that the

condit ion

of

possibi l i ty

of a deserted sland

would be basedon a

truce

in

the

ongoing confl ict

of land and water.

The

two other

elements

n

the

quadrant,

the

points

of view of science

and

of the

imagination

are clearly nterwoven in

the

discourse

of the dis-

t inct ion

being made between

the earth and

water.

But

the

imagination,

he

argues,had

already

pre-empted

he scientif icexplanation in i ts greater

psychogenesis

f

islands.

The

6lan of

humans

hat

lead thern oward islands akes

up the

double

t lovement

that

produces

he

islands

n themselves.b

dream of islands

(with

all

the

attendant

anguish

and

1oy)

s to

dream of separating

neself,

that

one

s already

eparated,ar

from

continents,hat that s alone

and

os t

-

or

else o dream hat

or.re egins gainat

zero,

hat one ecreates,

hat one

recommences.

here were

derived slands, ut the island s also

what one

derived

oward, and there

were

originary islands,

bu;- he

island

s

also the

origin,

he

radical

and

absolute rigin.

(Deleuze

002:

x)


4/7

212 Deleuze

nd Spoce

Recreation

and separation are warring forces,

ike the nature

of the com-

posite

elements

of

islands, n

which are reproduced

he movements at

th e

basisof the

causes or islands.The man

on

the

island he

calls deserted s

no more

separated rom

the world

than the island is

at a distance

ro m

a supposed

continent

from

which i t

was detached. No

longer does

th e

island

create

tself

by

piercing

the surface

of the sea rom

the bottom

of

the earth than the

man,

standing aloof and alone

on a shorel ine, would

recreates

he world on the basisof what

he perceives

o be the island and

its surrounding waters.

The radical implication of the crisscrossing f terms is that in his iso-

lation a

'man'

ascribes o

his

being two different origins,

one of

the

crea-

tion and the other of the being of the island. Man reenacts he originary

and derived creation of islands through the imagination of beginnings

that

geology

and cosmography had ascribed o the birth and evolution

of the core elements of the terrestrial sphere. Little distinction is made

between he subject as supremely hinking creature

(of

science nd

imag-

ination

that can

furnish

an adequate ontology

for i tself)

and the

forces

of the earth

itself,

whether

organic

or

inorganic

(that

create a senseof

conscienceand of being apart or separate rom

any

necessary

resence

of

man). The island, ike

whoever desires t, is of a conscience nto i tself,

' la

pure consciencede I'i le' (the pure conscienceof the island) (Deleuze

2002: 73),

being at the same ime of the

perceiver

and the

perceived

alike.

At this moment in the text

there occurs an event hat anticipates

much

of Deleuze'swork concerning the invention

of space.

When

he

causes

barriers to erode between he subject and object in the form of man

an d

the

island Deleuze mplicitly

engages

new

reflections on habitus. What,

why,

and where the desert

sland? Its

causesand reasonsmove with the

syntax that makes both

the

place

and the

hypothetical

man's desire o be

there t a

product

of the imagination. Deleuze

argues hat to say an island

is inhabited

does

not mean it is no longer

deserted. t can be deserted

where i t is inhabited. The

trope that

leads men

to the

island reproduces

that of i ts.own

creation

prior

to or after

human intervention.

By being

separateand separated rom the sea, he continent, and 'man', i t remains

in

a creativecondition.

The

space hat i t createsof i tself s reflected n the

syntactic shifts

in

the sentence hat opine to imagine

the sensationof the

shipwrecked sai lor's attraction

to the

island:

[I]l

n'y a

qu'i pousser

ans

imagination e mouvement u'amdne 'homme

sur l ' i le. Un tel mouvementne vient qu'en

apparence

ompre le

d6sertde

I' i le,en v6rit6 l reprend

et

prolonge

'6lan qui produisait

cel le-ci omme le

d6serte;oin

de

e

compromettre

l le porte

sa

perfection,

son comble.

It

suffices o push nto

the

magination

he movement hat man brings upon

TheDesertslond

21 3

the

sland.

A

movement

f this sort only

seems

o break he desert rom

th e

island, n

al l l ikel ihood t

takesup and

prolongs he 6lan hat

produced

he

latter as a desert sland; ar

from compromising

t he

brings t to i ts

perfec-

t ion,

o

i ts

zeni th.)

Deleuze

002:13)

When

the desert

s

broken

from

the

island,

al l of a sudden

we

realise

that

the

relation of the adjective, diserte, to i ts

substantive,

le, under-

goes

a

tectonic shift.

The island

was a continent inasmuch

as

t

contained

t

desert,

say,what we

imagine

to be an

quasi-infinite

expanseof

sand

n

rhe

orrid

zone

of

Africa. In

the eyes

of the

person

driven by an

6lan uital

rhe

island

-

in

al l

i ts implied

immensity

as a desert

would

be as such

only

when the

perceived

s separated rom

what he

or she

perceives

th e

desert

sland

-

from

within the imagination.

If men

were:

sr-rfficientiy

eparated, ufficiently

creative,

hey would

only

give

to

th e

island

a dynamic mage

of i tself,

a conscience

f the n.rovement

hat

pro-

cluced

t,

tcr he

point

that through man

the sland

]

trauers

'homme I' i le)

rvould

inal ly

akes

onsciencef i tself

asdeserred, i th

or without humans.

The sland

would only

be he man'sdream,

and he man,

he

pure

conscience

of the sland.

Deleuze

002: 13)

I)eleuze's words move

the

centre of

subjectivity in

the

perceiver

to

the island itself as a creative orce. Inhabitation, or a senseof being and

becoming-in-the-world,

eginswhen

the l lusion

of

mastery

of

the

sland

s

renounced

n favour

of

letting

the space ealise

a consciousness

f

i ts

own.

At

this

juncture,

in

the

revealing

formula

that makes

the island

th e

clream

of man

and

'l 'homme,

la pure

conscience

de I' i le', in

the

apposi-

tion

that makes

conscience

somerhing

shared by man

and the island

ll ike,

there is

created or recreated

a space

hat becomes

as such when

perceiver

and

perceived

exchange roles.

The parataxis

anticipates

what

I)eleuze

ater

cal ls

he

'space'

that becomes

he

momentary product

of

an

'cvcnt'

in

the context

of another

desert and an island

-

in

this

insrance

a

pvramid

that

pierces

the surface

of the

barren landscape

-

when

Napoleon's

troops march

across northern

Egypt. In question

is

prehen-

sior,

the

'act

of taking hold,

seizing,or

grasping'

an object

of one kind

or

another.

'Living

beings

prehend

water,

earth, carbon,

and salts. The

p,vramid

at a

given

moment prehends

Bonaparte's

soldiers

(forty

cenru-

r ies

are

contemplat ing ou),

and reciprocal ly '

Deleuze

9BB:106).

Space

is

created

when

the soldiers real ise,

whether in paranoid

fantasy

or

in

reali ty

of mil i tary

encounters,

that the

pyramids

are

observing

them.

7hen

the

'datum'

that

would be a

pyramid

erupts from

the floor

of the

desert

he

object of

the soldiers'

sensory

predication

rurns into

a subject

and

the

soldiers nto

the

predicate

or object

of the

pyramid's

gaze.


5/7

214

Deleuze

nd Spoce

Deleuze's

pregnant remarks

in Le

pli (1988)

are close to

those

that

concern he

invention of space

n

'Causes

et raisons de

I' i le

d6serte'.

Like

the

pyramid,

the desert

island exists

before and after the advent

of

humans

or

their

incursions

n

the world. The island is

a

'[clonscience

of

the earth

and the ocean

(

. . .

),

ready

to recommence

he world'

(Deleuze

2002:13).

Such

s

what applies n Le

pli

to the event and

the space

t

pro-

duces.

n

the

context

of

Leibniz

and Baroque

philosophy

he refineswhat

is imagined in the scenario

of the shipwrecked

sailor on the sand

an d

shore of the desert

sland. The

datum or

prehended

object becomes,

itself

a preexisting or coexisting prehension, and the event, a "nexus of pre-

hensions"'

(Deleuze

1988: 106).

Each

new prehension

(a

subjecti fying

force,

the

marooned

sailor taking stock of his situation on the

island)

becomesan object

(a

datum or a sai lor that the sai lor seesbeing seenby

the

island

)

that turns into a

public fact for

other

prehending

forces

that

would objecti fy

i t.

Thus the event

is

'inseparably

the objecti fication of

one

prehension

and the subjectification of another'

(pli

Deleuze 1988:

106), such hat both the

pyramid

and the island

are at once a

public

an d

a

private

affair, something simultaneously,

actual

and

potential,

enter-

ing into

the becoming of another event and the subject of i ts own becom-

ing'

(p l i

Deleuze1988: 106).

Space s experiencedas the intensity of the event and perhaps, oo, as

its inseparabil i ty

rom its duration. For this reason

(or

cause)

n his

work

on the desert

sland Deleuze s ed.

i t seems. o remark

that

'man'

as such

is

preceded

by

himself

and that,

'such

a creature on the desert sland

would

be the desert

island inasmuch

as the

island is

imagined and

reflected'

Deleuze

2002: x)

-

or

imagines

and

reflects tself

-

in i ts initial

movement,

that is, in i ts action of

prehending

its inhabitant. It might

be

said, too, that the spaceof the island is

born at the singular

point

where

the

man

and the

place

are at once in contact and

apart

from

each other.

The

philosopher

has

shown that the rebirth of

the

island

owes to the

independence

of the consciousness f the two

prehending

bodies, on the

one

hand

the shipwrecked sai lor and, on the

other, the beach on which

he

stands.

The

argument is further complicated

when

Deleuze notes

that a desert

is not

a

necessary

ttribute

of a deserted

sland. The

surrounding waters

of the sea

become the

'desert'

surrounding the egg-like

form

of

the

island.

The adjective

becomes a substantive when it is

assimilated

into

th e

smooth spaceof the sea, and by implication

the

island-egg

becomesan

adjective when it is

put

into

the service of a description of the ambient

mil ieu.

With

the deserted

sland is

born an isolated or insular,

but also

infinitely

extensivedesert.The sea urns into a aridly

expanseof sand and

TheDesertslond 215

the

island

an embryo

or a contained

world

of wonders

-

'with

the most

vivid

springs,

the

most

agile

fauna,

the

most dappled

flora, the

most

astonishing

oodstuffs,

he most

l iving

savages, nd

the shipwrecked

ma n

as

ts

most

precious fruit'

(Deleuze

2002: 14)

-

that

would be a

figment

of

imagination,

and

not a

product

entirely

of either

mythology or

eeologY.

Could

it be

inferred

as a

result that Deleuze's

sland belongs to a

Mediterreanan

or,

more specifically,

an Aegean archipelago?

For

up

to

this

point

in the essay

attention

is focussedon the

island

as

matter

an d

space

n the field of the imagination. 'What is i t to 'meditate' the causes

and

reasons

of

an island?

Does it have to do with the origins of

philoso-

phy,

as

he

later showed with

F6lix Guattari ,

in the Mediterranean?7

f the

sea

can

become

a desert and the

island an embryo of concepts, t can be

said

hat

the

philosopher is

speculating

on a

place

'in

the middle of the

earthen

ands',

mdsogeios, mass of land far from the sea, n contrast to

mediterraneus,

a term

that

the

Romans used to desig nate the sea they

called

their own

for the reason that i t is in the

'middle

of the lands'

(Franqois

de

Dainvi l le 1,964:1,01,).

The desert

and its island become an object of mediation and medita-

tion.

Montaigne, the sceptical

phi losopher

known to champion episte-

mology over ontology, argued that

'le

mediter est un puissant estude et

plein,

i

qui

sqait se aster et employer

vigoureusement'

(meditation

[but

also the act

of

meditating implied by the infinitive noun] is a

powerful

and full

study for those who know how to senseand employ themselves

vigorously)

before he immediately adds,

j 'aime

mieux forger mon

ame

que

a meubler'

(I

prefer

to forge

my

soul than to

furnish i t)

(Montaigne

1962:

797).8 In

the context of the essay

n which

the

remark is made

Montaigne

describes his tower, t he space

n

which

he

writes and thinks,

at

the

same

time that

he

speculates on the art of dividing and separating

entities

for

the

purpose

of

getting

to

know

them by virtue of

relating

and

comparing

them to one another.

To

classify

s

to separate and,

in

the

same

thrust,

to

recreate

and to

recommence. His

estude or study could be at

once

his

object and action of

reflection

-

his

art and science as well as

the

room

in which he thinks and writes.

It

could be at once the space he

forges,

a sea of infinite extension, and the desert island of his tower, the

place

he

inhabits to the

degree

hat i ts conscience s congruent with his

own.

By

comparative

means

he

island

becomes he spacewhere

philos-

ophy

works

and acts, a study that is the conscienceof i ts surroundings.

In

his

essayDeleuze eaches he Aegean archipelago by way of

a

l i ter-

ary

itinerary

that bears

resemblance

o what

Montaigne

equates o be the

identities

of

mediation

and meditation. The desert

sland

is

populated


6/7

216

Deleuze

nd

Spoce

with

myths,

argues

Deleuze,

nd

belongs

more

ro

mythology

han

the

science

f geography.

nasmuch

s

most people

refernot

to

understand

their

myths

hey

need

iterature

o intervene

nd o,

inrerpret

ingeniously

themyths

hat

can

no

onger

beunderstood',

speciall l,

t

those

mornents

when

myths

cannot

be

either

dreamt

or

reprod'ced.

Two

novels

built

from

the

thene

of the

desert

sland,

Jean

Giraud

oux's

Suzunne

t

le

Pacifique

and

Defoe's

Robinson

crusoe.

attest

o the

end

of

mythology.

In

the ater,

a book

so nsufferably

oring

hat

'it

is

sad

o

see hildren

stil l reading

t',

(Deleuze

002: 15), he proragonist, rn xemplar f the

Protestant

deal,

reats

he sland

as f it

were

2r

iece

f

private

property:

'The

mythic

recrearion

of

the

world from

the

very

being

of

the

desert

islandgives

way

to a reconsrrucrior-r

f

everyday

ourgeoisife

based

n

capital

nvestmenr'

Deleuze

002:

151.

Every

healthy

eader,

e

avows,

would

wish

that

Friday

he

slave

would

finally

cannibalise

obinson

n

order o

have

he narrarive

verre

he

assimilation

f the

mythology

of

the

desert sland

nto

the

puritan

ethic.

By

contrast,

Suzanne's

esert

island

n

Giraudoux's

reation

s

a

place

where

mythology

dies

because

the

objects n

the heroine's

midsr

eproduce

he

commodities

hat

circu-

late

n

modern

cities.

Tepid

and

tasteless,

he s

not

in

the company

of

originary

igures

f the

ikes

of

Adam,

but

of

young

cadavers,

nd when

shediscoversivingmen,she oves hemwith a uniform affection,n

th e

manner

of

priests,

s f

lovewere

he minimum

hreshold

of her percep-

tion'

(Deleuze

002:

76).

These

wo

novels

vividly

adduce

he fail,re

of

the inhabitant

of

a

desert

sland

ro

reach

he power

of myth

in

a space

n

which

myth

abounds.

hey

attest

o

the

deathof

myth

hat

n

Deleuze's

ssay

roader

reflection

.

desertic

pace

s

brought

orward

o

revive

and

re-energise.

Giraudoux's

'd

Defoe's

wo

works,genial

ymptoms

f a

parabola

ha t

leads

rom

myth to

rhenovel,

ncite

an mplementation

f

what might

be

called

he heory'

nd

practice

f

the

desertsland.e

n the

conclucling

ar -

agraph

of

the

essayDeleuze

begins,

as

if in

a

m:lnifesto,

[t]he

stakes

inr.'olveecoveringhe mythological ife of the desertsland'.As a corol-

lary,

returning

to

the

movement

f

the

magination

.

.

rur-ns

he desert

island

nto

a

model,

a

prororype

of

the

collecive

soul'

(Deleu

e 2002:

16).

The atter

s mplied

nor

ro

be

a social

movement

but

an mmanenr

presence

f

energy

and

vital

force.

Vital

force

is made

manifest

ess

through

he

creation

of

the sland

han ts

req'eation,

ts rebirth

or ren-

aissance

fter

a catasrrophe

ollowing

ts

birth.

one

principle

of a

crea-

tive epetition

nd variation

s

brought

orward

hrough

he rnagination

of

the sland,

a mountain

or

both

at

once)

pushing

bove

he

sea,

where

survivors

f an

originarydeluge

ecommence

ife

assuch.

Another

comes

The

Deserts lond 217

t[rough

a

cosmic

egg'

hat

eads o

the

creatior"r

f

Mediterranean

slands

-

Circ6

and

Calypso

where a separation

f

genders

romotes ecom-

mencement

hrough

parthenogenesis,

nd

where,

n

'an

idealof the

rec-

ol1trnencement

here

s something

he

precedes ommencement

tself '

(Deleuze

002:1.7),

which takes

up

the

atter

n

order

o deepen

t and

to

have

t

recede

n time.

The

desert

island,

no matter

if it

is

in the

Pacific or

in the

Mediterranean,

ecomes

he emblematic

lace

where

herecan be

per-

ceived riginarymyths and the concurrent orces hat generatehem.

Orrce

t

is hor.rght

f

in

this

way the desert

slandbecomeshevital space

of

creative

ifference

nd

repetition.Surely,

n the

historical

arabola

of

De

euze's

rit ing

'Causes

and

Reasous f

the Desert sland'

igures s a

prrr,rble

or

the

onger

work

on difference

nd repetition r a threshold,

ioltowing

his comparisons

f

eggs o Bodieswithout

Organs,

or the dis-

tirrction

of

'smooth'

and

'striated'

spaces

Deleuze

968;

Deleuzeand

Guattari

1980). More

importantly, n the

unconsciousegister

f

con-

ceprts

nd

he

words

hat are conveyed

n a languagehat is continually

being

born

of

itself, Deleuze'sle

d,lserte

an

be imaginedas something

insular,

nsular o the

degreehat

t remains,n

respect oth to itselfand

other

entit ies, ntirely

ingular.

esert slandsn the

earlyessay omprise

a igurirtive eography f singularitles n other writings. Theycan besaid

t


7/7

218

Deleuze

nd Spoce

Benitez-Rojo,A.

(1996i,

Tbe Repeating

sland: The

Catibbean and

the

Postmodern

Perspecti t ,e.rans.

J.

Maraniss,

Durham:

Duke Universi ty

Press'

Broc,

N.

(1989),

La

gdographie e

Ia Renaissance

1420-1520),Paris Bibl iothdque

Nationale.

Deleuze,G.

(1968),

Diffirence et ripdtition,

Paris: PUF.

Deleuze,G.

(1983),

Cindma

1: L' image

mouuement,

Paris:Minui t .

Deleuze,G.

(1988),

Le

pl i :

Leibni :

et le baroque,

Paris:

Minui t .

Deleuze,G.

(2002),

Causes t raisons

des

les dlsertes

et .tLttresextes:

Textes

et entre-

tiens

1953-1974,

ed.

D. Lapoujade,

Paris:Minui t .

Deleuze,G. and

Guattari ,

F.

(1980),

Mille

plateaux,

Paris:

Minui t .

Deleuze,G.

and

Guatt ari,

F.

('l'9921,

Oi

est-ce

que

la

philosopbie?,

Paris:

Minuit.

De Montaigne,M.

(1,962),

Oeuures

omplAtus,

d. M.

Rat and A.

Thibaudet,

Paris:

Gallimard/Pleiade.

Fin6, O.

(1532).

Protomathesis, aris:

G.

Morrhi i and

I. Petri .

F in6,

O.

(1553),

Le sphire du

monde,

Paris:Vasconsan.

Fin6,O.

(1558),

La th1oriquedes

cieulx et sept

plani tes,

Paris:G. Cavel lat.

Franqois e Dainvil le,

S.

J.

(1964),

Le langage es

g1ograpbes,

aris:Picard.

Gallois, L.

(19631,

Les

g1ographes allemands

de

la Renaissance,

Amsterdam:

Meridian Reprint.

LeviStrauss,C.

(L992),

Histoire de

lynx,

Paris: Plon.

Lukacs, G.

(797I),

Thectry of t he

Nouel:

A Historico-Philosophical

Essay

on

the

Forms of Great

Epic

Literature, trans.

A. Bostock,

Cambridge:

MIT Press.

Tuan, Yi-fu

(1990),

Topophilia: A

Study of

Enuironmental

Perception,

Attitudes

and

Values,

New

York:

Coiumbia

University

Press.

Notes

1.

By

contrast

it is informative

to appose the

work

of Yi-fu Tuan.

including

Topophilia

(1990),

to that

of

Deleuze. From

the experience

of

space

Tuan

obtains

concepts

r mentaImaps

hat,

in turn mediate

ts discovery

nd

percep-

t ion.

2. Deletze2002z

17. Further reference

o this article

will be made

in

the

text.

For

the

purpose

of the rhetoric of rhis

article all allusion

is made to the French

exts.

Their translations

into English

are my responsibility.

This essay

was begun

before

the

2004

publication of an

English

edition,

Desert Islands

and Other

Texts

(1.953-1974),

translated

by Mike Taormina

(Cambridge

and

London:

Semiotext(e).

3. In a comparative

treatment

of

the films of Erich

von Stroheim and

l-uis

Bufruel,

Deleuze

notes

hat the originary

world:

does

not

exist independently

of determined

milieus,

but

inversely

causes hat

world to

exist with characters

and

traits that come

from higher up'

or

rather

from an even

more terrifying

depth[fond].

The

originary

world is

a beginning

of the world,

but alsoan end

of the world, and

he

rresist ible ownward

slope

of the one

o the other:

t is what

carries

he

median

area,and also

what causes

it to be a

closed, absolutely

hermetic

milieu,

or else

what opens

it ever

so

sl ight lyonto

an

uncertainhope.

(Deleuze

983:

176-7\

The movement

can

be called Chaplinesque

because,

n

a

memorable

sequence

f

The Idle Class

1.924),

a

film that

figures

prominently

in Deleuze's

pantheon, he

rramp

escapes

apprehension

by the

police

by

jumping

into

and

out of thick

masses f shrubbery.

He baits

the law as he evades

t.

Apian 1529;

and Oronce

Fin6's

works,

including

th e

The

Desertslond

21 9

Protctntathesi-s

1.i3

2

,

Le spltire

du monde

(

-5.5-l

and La

thdr>ritt te

le

cieulx

(t

s(pt

pldni tes

(15.58).

.5 .

Broc 1980:

68, o l lou ' ing

-uc ien

Gal lo is

1963:

145.

6.

Broc 1980:

69. A

comparative

history

of each

of

t l .rese

erms

is

included

in

Chapter

2

(hydrography)

f Franqois

e

Dainvi l le 1964:97-115.

7.

In

their

chapter,

Geo-phi losophie'

in

Deleuze

r.rd

Guattari

1992.

8.

For the rc ' lat ion

of

ontologr.to

epistemologr',

ased

on

the renri rrk,

s i rni lar

q

what

Deleuze

makes

of a man and an islancl,hat,

we

haveno cclrnmunication

ni t l - r

be ing ' , ee

dv i -Srrnuss

992:218-20.

9. In this

respect

Deleuze

ol lows

closely

Gyiirgy Lukdcs

(197

11.

n

which

imma-

nence

of

epic

ar-rd

yth) are

compared

o

a

lapsarian

ondi t ion

(of

the

modern

rlovel

.

l ().

A comprehensive

tudy

of

rhegenre

s

contained n

Frar.rk

estringant

2003),

.e

Liure

des /es

Geneva:

Droz, 2003).

Deleuze and Space [Chapter 12]

Documents

Transcript of Deleuze and Space [Chapter 12]