Straight fire, and the comparison of Zupančič and Deleuze is utterly central. It is so so so critical to continue refining what is at stake between these two.
Totally agree, re: the comparison of Zupančič and Deleuze. What I think we are dealing with at its zero-level, is the difference between Lacan (the anti-philosopher) and Deleuze (the philosopher), where the Slovenian school has managed to take Lacan's anti-philosophy and bring it to the Deleuzian philosophical moment of our time (filled as it is with spurious infinities and excessive immediacies).
Beautifully put and I completely agree. For Belonging Again (Part II), I have a folder of notes, papers, scribblings, scratches...on Deleuze, Hegel, Lacan, Hume, and Nietzsche, and whenever I open the folder I kind of scream a little. I do certainly think this is the core debate...just need about fifteen more hours in the day...Again, really appreciate how you approached the conversation in this very well-written piece.
Straight fire, and the comparison of Zupančič and Deleuze is utterly central. It is so so so critical to continue refining what is at stake between these two.
Totally agree, re: the comparison of Zupančič and Deleuze. What I think we are dealing with at its zero-level, is the difference between Lacan (the anti-philosopher) and Deleuze (the philosopher), where the Slovenian school has managed to take Lacan's anti-philosophy and bring it to the Deleuzian philosophical moment of our time (filled as it is with spurious infinities and excessive immediacies).
Beautifully put and I completely agree. For Belonging Again (Part II), I have a folder of notes, papers, scribblings, scratches...on Deleuze, Hegel, Lacan, Hume, and Nietzsche, and whenever I open the folder I kind of scream a little. I do certainly think this is the core debate...just need about fifteen more hours in the day...Again, really appreciate how you approached the conversation in this very well-written piece.