- 400 pages
People who bought this also bought
About Admin Fromm
I could possibly say that this book ruined my life. I have never grappled with a book for as long as this one, for months I read and re-read it. I decided that I had to incorporate it into a paper that ended up taking me over a year to actually write and then edit, and then edit some more and then write some more before I finally decided to mail the stupid thing out to the professor from a mailbox that happened to be in front of some buildings that some planes would crash into about an hour or s [...]
Highly recommend having some experience with Marx, Freud, and Levi-Strauss; Nietzsche, Lacan, and Saussure will also be helpful.You don't gotta read the whole thing! The first and last chapters will give you the gist of the book's main ideas. The takeaway: Dissolve into the flux you already are. Summary: Anti-Oedipus has two aims. The first is to critique the prevailing Freudian/Lacanian psychoanalytic model of the ego, which D&G call "Oedipus." The second is to create a new conception of su [...]
yo capitalism. i have sunbeams coming out of my ass.
When I was in England I joined an informal discussion group about this book. The group included my advisor and his wife. We read the first paragraph and his wife said, "That paragraph is sexist." My advisor swore at his wife, and then the discussion group was done.
I think people FEEL like they should give this book five stars -- but, unlike machines, they are not honest with themselves and feel compelled to rate it higher than it deserves. 1968 drivel.
more like de-loser and gua-farty
One of my top few favorite books ever. Wacky prose that hides its dense, educated side with unabashededly mindfucking disregard for mores, academic humility, linearity. It's more or less a critique of the early Lacan's emphasis on the Oedipal complex and the way that emphasis typifies structural analysis in anthropology and psychology, which was trying to edge out philosophy in France at the time. Of course, since it's Deleuze, it also has a vitalist, anti-law, anti-transcendence agenda. Since i [...]
Psychoanalysis was from the start, still is, and perhaps always will be a well-constituted church and a form of treatment based on a set of beliefs that only the very faithful could adhere to, i.e those who believe in a security that amounts to being lost in the herd and defined in terms of common and external goals.My review from 1994 would be gushing, one near febrile abuzz with the insights revealed in this suicide vest of a book. My 2011 self appreciates the arsenal of metaphors and allusion [...]
I've actually had a copy of this book for several months, but, honestly, it keeps tossing me out around page 7 or so. Like my mind shatters after about 7 pages of this. I can't tell whether or not it is bullshit. It seems like something is going on here that maybe I am not equipped to understand, almost like when I am trying to read a book in an antiquated form of French (because my modern French isn't even very good). This book is a little vortex, a little black hole that keeps pulling me back [...]
The introduction by Foucault is certainly a healthy way to view this book. As a guide to leading a non-fascist life, this work condenses a great number of ideas, and attempts to dismantle/discourse on the hang-ups of would-be revolutionary groups.I would describe the writing style as delirious. At times it is very lucid, hitting hard at ideas standing in the way of the non-fascist life and free thought. At others, the prose descends, or rather extends (explodes?) down lines of escape, off in a m [...]
Reading this book was an exercise in frustration. Occasionally productive frustration, but frustration nonetheless. While I was reading it, I referred to it as "the book I don't understand." But I think in the end I did get something out of it.So this is Deleuze and Guattari's big attack on Freud, Lacan, and basically all of psychoanalysis. They suggest that psychoanalysis decides your diagnosis from the start (ie everyone has an Oedipus complex), and proceeds from that point. You can never fini [...]
This is pop philosophy and not serious political thought. If Orwell read this he would have eaten it and then puked it out projectile vomit style. It is the postmodern writing that so terrifies Sokal. All of that being said, it is damned fun to read. Just don't take it too seriously. People who fall deeply into this stuff become pretentious hipster assholes. The introduction by Foucault is important if you want any chance in understanding this mess. It sure could use more footnotes.
done done donezo with this Whopper/Big Mac of an attempt to liberate everyone from everything through the embrace of deterritorialized schizo-desire and the rejection of paranoiac Oedipalized reterritorialization. Essentially the optimistic, convoluted counterpoint to Baudrillard's gnomic, solution-free work--but in neither case are the "answers" answers in any specific case. This book, of which I read about 70%--glossing over much of "The Holy Family" and the first half of "Savages, Barbarians, [...]
Some day I will read some Deleuze. Meanwhile, my first attempt at this volume two years ago has left the following passage haunting me, that phrase, "A schizophrenic out for a walk. . ." . . a better model than a neurotic lying on the analyst's couch. A breath of fresh air, a relationship with the outside world. Lenz's stroll, for example, as reconstructed by Büchner. This walk outdoors is different from the moments when Lenz finds himself closeted with his pastor, who forces him to situate hi [...]
to me this was the philosophical equivalent of thinking you know what jazz is (smoky, midnight, bar) and then hearing bitches brew challenging but in yr face liberating. i especially admired the strategic use of dull old Kant to mess with heads.
oedipus?? i hardly knew me mother [seraphs descend from the heavens to highfive the wickedest analysand of all]
1) Oedipus: Power is maintained by our submission to the Oedipus myth; Oedipus myth as a psychological explanation of why the masses accept a system which does not favour their own interests.2) In Western Civilisation desire is conceived of as a means of acquisition rather than a means of production. This slant is important in maintaining the surplus, capitalist economy and any revolution would have to alter the perception we have of desire. From a glance at the other reviews on this is a kind [...]
One of the most important philosophical books in 20th century. Not for the beginners.
Before A Thousand Plateaus, Deleuze and Guattari penned this sprawling critical analysis of modernity. Essentially a synthesis of Freudian psychology and Marxist theory, this is one of the weirdest and most interesting books I've ever read. The reader must be prepared to confront an idiosyncratic (and obfuscating, according to the critics) sort of jargon: "desiring machines" plug into one another to form "assemblages" that constitute the social order, or "socius inscribed upon the body without o [...]
"I said my mothers deadWell I don't care about itI said my father's deadWell I don't care about itIt happens anywayIt happens anywayOn the edge of BurmaWe're on the edge of Burma"When I first read this I didn't fully understand it; it only really made sense after reading Difference and Repetition. This is one of the weirdest books I've ever read. The central thesis is that society has become "Oedipalized." The very myth of the Oedipus complex is producing neurotics instead of helping people beca [...]
In his foreword, M Foucault interprets Anti-Oedipus as a book of ethics. This isn't evident from the text itself, as the authors are (almost) never explicit about how one should live. Instead they invent and combine neologisms like desiring-production, body without organs and deterritorialization to build their philosophy, making for a confounding couple hundred pages before you get a handle on the terminology. And the translators into English don't help - I'm sure they tried their best, but som [...]
Other reviewers are better at describing the content. I can say that it messes with my head in a good way every time I pick it up. It took me two tries to finish it, which I've done twice. I have partially read it several more times (it bogs down in the middle and it's hard to push through all the anthropological stuff about "filiation".) I love the way it rips Freud a new one, condemning Oedipus as a fascist mechanism. But there's so much more here. It will change the way you think. I also cann [...]
This is one of those theory books that I find so much meaning in that I can just open a page and read anything into it. In fact, Frank & I came up with a game called "The Anti-Oedipus 8-Ball" where we walk around with the book and let people ask us questions then we open a page (any page) and read. Try it; it's like magic or something.
Marx, meet Freud and Lacan. Freud and Lacan, meet Deleuze and Guatarri they're the ones who are going to drug you, steal your clothes, and walk you naked through the streets. In Anti-Oedipus, D&G introduce and "thoroughly" describe their project of "schizoanalysis".
in my top 5 theory books of all time, and one of my favorite books across genre/divides, period. the style makes me smile every time i read it, and the point is one of the most important to me as well.
I've given up reading philosophy that isn't well-written. Life is too short.
Read it just for this line on page 5 or 6, "The neurotic on the analysts couch we find alot less relevent then the schizophrenic out for a walk" -signed A schizophrenic out for a walk --Kassy
Deleuze along with Guattari debunk with aplomb one of the main tenets in psychoanalytic theory. It's a terrific read.
D&G are fantastic writers imho.