ENG 913: The Force of 'Representation': Adorno and Deleuze (fall 2007)
There are [...] two ways of reading a book: you either see it as a box with something inside and start looking for what it signifies, and then if you're even more perverse or depraved you set off after signifiers. [...] Or there's the other way: you see the book as a little non-signifying machine, and the only question is 'Does it work, and how does it work?' How does it work for you? If it doesn't work, if nothing comes through, you try another book. The second way of reading's intensive: something comes through or it doesn't. There's nothing to explain, nothing to understand, nothing to interpret. It's like plugging into an electric circuit. (Gilles Deleuze, "Letter to a Harsh Critic," Negotiations 7-8).
Wenn aber Philosophie überhaupt einmal mit dem Wirklichen es zu tun hat, dann ist es klar, dass ein bloss kontemplatives Verhältnis zu diesem Wirklichen, ein sich selbst genügendes, ein also nicht auf Praxis abzielendes deshalb unsinnig ist, weil ja eigentlich bereits der Akt des Denkens über Wirkliches selbst ein--sei es auch immer seiner selbst noch nicht bewusster--praktischer Akt ist. [Ein wesentlicher Moment meiner Generalthese ist der Gedanke,] dass Interpretation selber soviel ist wie Kritik; dass es Interpretation anders denn als kritische Interpretation überhaupt nicht geben kann--und nicht etwa als affirmative. Aber ohne eine solche Interpretation, also ohne den ausgeführten und seiner selbst mächtigen Gedanken, würde ich glauben, gibt es eine wahre Praxis nicht. [...] Und ich würde sagen, dass die Möglichkeit einer richtigen Praxis zunächst einmal das volle und das ganz ungeminderte Bewusstsein der Verstelltheit von Praxis ihrerseits voraussetzt.
[But if philosophy actually encounters reality, then it is clear that a mere contemplative relation to this reality, one which suffices itself, one, that is, which does not aim at praxis, is senseless precisely because an act of thinking about reality itself is already a--even if it is always one that is not conscious of itself--practical act. [A crucial moment of my general thesis is the thought] that interpretation itself amounts to critique ; that interpretation otherwise than critical interpretation cannot exist--and not as affirmative either. But without such an interpretation, that is, without the enacted and self-controlling thought, I would think, true praxis does not exist. [...] And I would say that the possibility of a correct praxis first of all presupposes the full and completely unimpaired consciousness of the blockage of praxis itself. (Theodor Adorno, Vorlesung über Negative Dialektik 75, 80, 84, translation mine)]
This seminar examines the thought of two seminal thinkers of the 20th century, Theodor Adorno and Gilles Deleuze, who are commonly thought to be proponents of contrary philosophies. The former is a co-founder of the Institute for Social Research (a.k.a. the so-called Frankfurt School) and its most famous and influential member; today, he is frequently dismissed as an elitist curmudgeon who hated popular culture and consequently spent considerable intellectual energy critiquing what he and his collaborator Max Horkheimer termed the "culture industry." The latter, in contrast, passionately disliked 'schools' and is generally known for the affirmative quality characteristic of his writings. It is, to use a corny analogy, as if Adorno were from the philosophical equivalent of Mars and Deleuze from Venus, considering that the former was perhaps last century's greatest practitioner of 'negative critique' and the latter its most rigorous opponent. It is likely for this reason that little scholarly work has been done to examine these two seemingly incompatible thinkers together. Adorno and Deleuze? Should it not be Adorno vs. Deleuze?
As an initial point of departure, however, I want to offer the hypothesis that the seemingly well-established incommensurability between Adorno's and Deleuze's theoretical works is less a well-established and settled truth of intellectual history than a problematic yet provocative marker of a fundamental non-encounter in post-WWII continental philosophy. Thinkers of radical immanence, both the German and the French offer a set of tools that tend to fly in the face of most critical paradigms en vogue today--from psychoanalytic approaches to film and literature to cultural studies methodologies and assumptions, to various versions of old and new historicism and positivist historiography, to any form of identity politics--because of the role the concept of 'representation' plays in their thought. Indeed, it is the way in which both thinkers pursue a radical line of inquiry into the work done by 'representation' that might reveal an interesting conjunction between Adorno and Deleuze, a theoretical copula that, perhaps, might have productive effects for our thinking on literature, film, ethics, politics, and the work of academic criticism and pedagogy. Ironically, the reception of them as incompatible thinkers may be symptomatic of the very problem both diagnose so relentlessly in their work. To wit, it might perhaps be the force representational thought has (on us) that helps explain why critical discourse has trouble thinking the two simultaneously (except in terms of contradiction): because we tend to read them for what they say--their texts' content--we neglect heeding the rhythm and movements, the rhetorical affect, of their theoretical interventions-- how they engage whatever objects are at hand.
In order to develop a rigorous understanding of both thinkers and how they theorize the concept of 'representation'--and, ultimately, that of the 'subject'--we are going to read a great numer of major and minor texts by both thinkers, beginning with some of the central philosophical statements followed by a series of sessions organized around specific topics and concepts both of them engaged. The primary goal of this seminar is to afford students with the possibilities deeply to immerse themselves in the thought of these two continental thinkers. In addition to simply trying to understand these theories, however, we are going to be equally, if not more, interested in figuring out what one can do with them--in discovering what opportunities for critical, political, and ethical engagement with the world Adorno's and Deleuze's writings afford us.
In addition to simply trying to get our heads around the conceptual matrix of our class’s texts, I envision this course to do specific work for you. For one, becoming more familiar with the theorists we cover is bound to help you in future job interviews. Not only will you have something to say about these thinkers when any of their names are being mentioned, but I hope you will also be able to mobilize theory as a tool to engage whatever questions are being thrown at you. That is, I want us to focus on what theory can do, more so than debating what it “means.” One of the things it can do, based on my experience, is provide helpful tools for breaking down, framing, and articulating in a concise manner some of the basic moves of any argument—a skill that comes in very handy not only in interview situations but also when writing your job letter, teaching, or writing your own research essays.
In order to get job interviews, however, it can’t hurt to have a good c.v. (to say the least). To this end, I envisage the conference paper and the longer research paper as a double-whammy display of academic prowess: my hope is that you will write a shorter paper (8-10 pages, or 2,500-3,000 words) that you will indeed submit to a conference, and that you will use the research paper (20-30 pages, or 6,000-9,000 words) as an opportunity to craft a scholarly/theoretical essay consciously geared toward publication with a good peer-reviewed academic journal in a field relevant to your larger area of interest. To facilitate this outcome, we will spend some time talking about how to make theoretical arguments by attending to how the texts we read are constructed.
Beyond this in-class activity, however, I also propose that we schedule 2 conference-presentation sessions, to be held after fall break (around week 10?), outside of class, in the early evening, at my home (I’ll supply some drinks and food). We would arrange “panels” for each day, with a maximum of 3 participants per panel and no more than 2 per extra session. You won't have to come on the day you are not scheduled to present, though you may certainly choose to do so. For both days, I’m thinking along the following lines: begin with 1st panel of non more than 3 presenters, including Q&A; then a pizza and beer/wine/or-whatever-beverage-you-fancy break; then 2nd panel of no more than 3 presenters, including Q&A. The goal of doing this is to provide you with some extra practice presenting a paper and negotiating a subsequent Q&A session. Further, the potential feedback you receive from your peers (in addition to the written feedback you get from me on your presentation paper) might help you develop your argument for your final research paper. While I know that I cannot force you to agree to these extra sessions, I hope that you see the potential benefit this may have for you and thus agree to do this (I don’t want to take up classroom time for this).
I envision the final research paper as an expanded version of your presentation paper. As for the subject matter of your paper, you are free to choose whatever you want to—as long as you produce an essay that is well researched, informed by/engaged in a conversation with our course focus, intelligently argued, appropriately documented, and conceived with an eye on future publication. Your paper may put into practice what you have learned about these theorists. For instance, you could engage poetry, fiction, drama, creative non-fiction, television, sports, film, music, architecture, the Internet, visual art, as well as social/aesthetic formations (women’s health and visual technologies; race and genetics; the new economy; etc.). You may also choose to write a straight-up theory paper, engaging one or both theorists on his or their own terms. The minimum requirement is simply that you seriously engage Adorno or Deleuze or both, and that your paper is a scholarly paper.
In general, I welcome and indeed encourage you to talk to me about your project ideas--the earlier the better. While I can’t write these papers for you, I think I may be able to guide you in the process of researching, thinking through, framing, and revising your argument.
The only project ideas I will not accept are straight-up "creative" projects (i.e., a set of poems, a short story, or a chapter of a novel; creative non-fiction is also something that by and large is inappropriate for this course). I am simply not qualified to evaluate such writing. In any case, non-scholarly writing is not appropriate for a class that emphasizes scholarly research and critical theory, just as writing a theory paper on Adorno would not be appropriate for a creative writing course focusing on the art of short story writing).
Requirements & Grading
Required Books:
Note 1: The required books will be ordered through the University bookstore, but you may be able to find cheaper used copies of these texts through websites such as Half.com or Amazon.com. And in case you have not used Internet book-price comparison search engines, Google “books” and “price compare” to find a number of helpful search engines that allow you to locate the cheapest copies available on the net. All other essays taken from books that are not required will be distributed electronically (e-reserve, web).
Note 2: Due dates for papers are set and non-negotiable. I want to emphasize the latter: I do not give incompletes, as I think they are in 99.9% of the cases disasterous for everyone involved--and you should not operate under the assumption that you are miraculously among the 0.01% for whom this does not hold true.
Note 3: OFFICE HOURS are Wednesday, 2:00 - 3:00 pm and Thursday, 1:00 - 3:00 pm. Or by appointment, in case these times overlap with your course and/or teaching schedule.
Week 1 (8/29): The Basics
Adorno, Negative Dialectics : "Preface," "Introduction," "Part 1" [135pp]
Week 2 (9/5): The Basics
Adorno, Negative Dialectics : "Part 2"; Adorno & Horkheimer, "The Concept of Enlightenment" [100pp];
Hegel, "Lordship and Bondage" [12 pp]
Week 3 (9/12): The Basics
Deleuze, Difference and Repetition : "Prefaces," "Introduction," "Chapter 1,
"Chapter 2" [135pp]
Week 4 (9/19): The Basics
Deleuze, Difference and Repetition : "Chapter 3," "Chapter 4," "Chapter 5,"
"Conclusion" [175pp]
Week 5 (9/26): Methods
Adorno, Critical Models : "Why Still Philosophy?," "Critique"; Prisms : "Cultural
Criticism and Society"; Notes to Literature Vol. 1 : "The Essay as Form"; Notes to
Literature Vol. 2 : "Commitment"
Deleuze: Nietzsche and Philosophy , "Chapter 3," Chapter 5" [170pp]
Week 6 (10/3): Aesthetics
Adorno, Aesthetic Theory : "Draft Introduction," pp 1-163 [190pp]
Week 7 (10/10): Aesthetics
Adorno, Aesthetic Theory : pp 163-332 [170pp]
Week 8 (10/17): Laguage & Art
Deleuze & Guatari, A Thousand Plateaus: "Chapter 4," "Chapter 5";
What is Philosophy?, "Introduction," "Chapter 7" [130pp]
Week 9 (10/24): Kafka
Adorno, Prisms: "Notes on Kafka"
Deleuze & Guattari, Kafka [130pp]
OUT-OF-CLASS CONFERENCE PRESENTATION, MONDAY, 10/29, 6:30 pm, @ Marco's house
Week 10 (10/31): Literature
Adorno, Notes to Literature Vol. 1 : "Trying to Understand Endgame," "Words
from Abroad"; Notes to Literature Vol. 2 : "On the Use of Foreign Words"
Deleuze, Dialogues II , "On the Superiority of Anglo-American Literature";
Essays Critical and Clinical : "Literature and Life," "Bartleby; or, the Formula,"
"He Stuttered," "To Have Done with Judgment," "The Exhausted" [170pp]
Week 11 (11/7): Music
Adorno, Philosophy of New Music [190pp]
Week 12 (11/14): Painting
Deleuze, Francis Bacon: The Logic of Sensation [180pp]
Week 13 (11/21): THANKSGIVING BREAK
Week 14 (11/28): Film & TV
Adorno: The Culture Industry : "Transparencies on Film," "How to Look at
Television"; Critical Models : "'Prologue to Television," "Television as Ideology"
Deleuze: Two Regimes of Madness : "The Brain is the Screen"; Cinema 1: The
Movement-Image : "Prefaces," "The Origin of the Crisis: Italian neo-realism and
the French new wave"; Cinema 2: The Time-Image : "Preface," "Chapter 1,"
"Chapter 2," "Chapter 6," "Chapter 7," "Chapter 8," "Chapter 10" [240pp]
Week 15 (12/5): Politics
Adorno: Critical Models : "Opinion Delusion Society"; The Culture Industry :
"Culture and Administration," "Free Time," "Resignation"
Deleuze, Dialogues II : "Many Politics"; Two Regimes of Madness , "Desire and
Pleasure"; Desert Islands , "On Capitalism and Desire," "Intellectuals and Power";
Negotiations : "Control and Becoming," "Postscript to Control Societies"; Deleuze
and Guattari, A Thousand Plateaus : "Micropolitics and Segmentarity," "Treatise
on Nomadology--The War Machine" [230pp]
Week 16 (12/12): Reflections
Adorno, Excerpts from Minima Moralia [TBA]
Deleuze, Two Regimes of Madness : "We Invented the Ritornello," "Immanence:
A Life" [200pp]
FINAL RESEARCH PAPER DUE AT END OF CLASS
Note: It will be impossible to cover each text in its entirety. While my hope and expectation is that you will read all texts from first to last page, I ask you to do your best to read as much as you can. I may also point you in advance to specific passages that I consider more crucial than others. However, unlike in an undergraduate course where it is often necessary to take students by the hand and work them through a text page by page, I believe a 9xx-graduate level course should expect participants to operate on a relatively independent level.
Additional Readings:
The following is a necessarily incomplete, highly selective list of writings on Adorno and Deleuze. You might find that these are good sources to begin your own research, but inevitably you will find that you will desire sources that speak more directly to your own research concerns.
Alliez, Eric. The Signature of the World: What is Deleuze and Guattari's Philosophy? New York: Continuum, 2004. [Of the many "explications" of &G, this is one of the best.]
Badiou, Alain. Deleuze: The Clamor of Being. Minneapolis: U Minnesota P, 2000. [A critique of Deleuze, which ultimately strikes me as wrong-headed--but one worthy to be read nevertheless, certainly much more so than Zizek's hatchet-job, Organs withouth Bodies.]
Bernstein, J. M. Adorno: Disenchantment and Ethics. New York: Cambridge UP, 2001.
Buck-Morss, Susan. The Origin of Negative Dialectics: Theodor Adorno, Walter Benjamin, and the Frankfurt Institute. New York: the Free Press, 1979. [A seminal early study of NG.]
During, Eli. "Blackboxing in Theory: Deleuze versus Deleuze." French Theory in America. Ed. Sylvere Lotringer and Sande Cohen. New York: Routledge, 2001: 163-189. [A good overview of the uses and abuses of Deleuze by American academics.]
Foucault, Michel. "Theatrum Philosophicum." [MF's seminal review of GD's Difference and Repetition and The Logic of Sense.]
Hullot-Kentor, Robert. Things Beyond Resemblance: Collected Essays on Theodor Adorno. New York: Columbia UP, 2006
Jameson, Fredric. Late Marxism: Adorno, or, the Persistence of the Dialectic. New York: Verso, 1990.
Jay, Martin. The Dialectical Imagination: A History of the Frankfurt School and the Institute of Social Research, 1923-1950. Boston: Little, Brown, 1973. [An early, seminal account of the FS.]
Lecercle, Jean-Jacques. Deleuze and Language. New York: Palgrave, 2002. [The book on lanuage Deleuze never wrote.]
Massumi, Brian. A User's Guide to Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1996. [An early book in this genre, but unusually innovative for what it claims to be.]
Milles, James. "Is Bad Writing Necessary?: George Orwell, Theodor Adorno, and the Politics of Literature." Lingua Franca 9.9 (December/January 2000). [This is an essay I taught in undergraduate Rhetoric & Composition classes and highly recommend it; it's great to get a good conversation going on the issue of what counts as "good" writing and the purpose and force of such "good" (or "bad") writing. On the same issue, see also Smith below.]
Nealon, Jeffrey T. "Maxima Immoralia? Speed and Slowness in Adorno's Minima Moralia." Theory & Event 4.3 (2000). Access through Project Muse.
Nealon, Jeffrey T. Alterity Politics: Ethics and Performative Subjectivity. Durham: Duke UP, 1998. [Not on Deleuze per se, but a "Deleuzean" engagement with various thinkers and theories.]
Nealon, Jeffrey T. and Caren Irr. Rethinking the Frankfurt School: Alternative Legacies of Cultural Critique. Albany: SUNY Press, 2002.
New German Critique. [Over the course of its history, this journal has featured the most essays on Adorno, as well as the Frankfurt School in general.]
Rodowick, D. N. Gilles Deleuze's Time Machine. Durham: Duke UP, 1997. [Still one of the best takes on Deleuze's cinema books.]
Shaviro, Steven. The Cinematic Body. Minneapolis: U Minnesota P, 1991. [My favortie book on Deleuze.]
Smith, Daniel. "Ethics and Bad Writing: Dialectics, Reading, and Affective Pedagogy." JAC 23 (2003): 525-525.
Thomas, Calvin. "A Knowledge that Would Not Be Power: Adorno, Nostalgia, and the Historicity of the Musical Subject." New German Critique 48 (Autumn 1989): 155-175.
Toole, David. "Of Lingering Eyes and Talking Things: Adorno and Deleuze on Philosophy Since Auschwitz." Philosophy Today 37.3 (Fall 1993) [One of the few critical essays engaging both Adorno and Deleuze.]
Zuidervaart, Lambert. Adorno's Aesthetic Theory: The Redemption of Illusion. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1991. [Still the quintessential study on AT.]
From the Legal Department:
The university’s policy on academic honesty is stated in the “Student Code of Conduct.” The policy prohibits plagiarism, cheating on examinations, unauthorized collaboration, falsification, and multiple submissions. Violation of the policy will result in failing the class, in addition to disciplinary sanctions.
Students with disabilities are encouraged to contact the instructor for a
confidential discussion of their individual needs for academic accommodation.
It is the policy of the University of Nebraska-Lincoln to provide flexible
and individualized accommodation to students with documented disabilities that
may affect their ability to fully participate in course activities or to meet
course requirements. To receive accommodation services, students must be registered
with the Services for Students with
Disabilities (SSD) office, 132 Canfield Administration, 472-3787 voice or TTY.