RE: Rhizome and geneology


Geneology, in so far as what D&G refer to, does not even refer directly to
the family, to geneology proper, that which we would assume to be their
first point of attack, the Oedipal triangle, but to things that Borges
refers to as mirrors and copulation. These two curious objects that, within
the world of Uqbar, have been declared as abominable because they "increase
the number of men." It is the act of reproduction, in any form that it may
appear: biological in the people we influence, the children we raise (and
this is where geneology proper is included but does not claim exclusivity
in D&G's attack), conceptual at this point once crossed we have created an
idea, a belief and the question (doubt) no longer counsels our thought
(similar to when Foucault says that liberty is an activity, not something
we achieve), or that which appears in our landscape--the public roads we
traverse, the buildings in which we live--that D&G wish to destroy, these
things that are anti-deterritorial which require us to deterritorialize,
those things that reproduce the world.

-----Message d'origine-----
De: dent@xxxxxxxxx [SMTP:dent@xxxxxxxxx]
Date: 14 mars, 1999 15:41
A: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Objet: Rhizome and geneology

Deleuze and Guatarri refer to the rhizome as being an "anti-geneology". I
can understand that application to the geneological tree, such as a family
tree, but would that therefore also extend to foucauldian geneology? If
is a criticism rooted in history and power relations possible in a
rhizomatic world?


"If at the base there has not been the work of thought...we know that
[reform] will be swamped, digested by modes of behavior and institutions
that will always be the same."
-Michel Foucault, _Liberation_ interview, May 1981

Partial thread listing: