On Rhizomes

[NOTE: the content within parentheses, small font are my comments and doubts]

Book has only itself; it is neither a signifier nor a signified. We will not look for anything to understand in it

Book exists only through the outside and on the outside

Literature is an assemblage

All we talk about are multiplicities

The Tree is already the image of world

Principle of Unity

            From Dichotomous root and tap root

                                    to        

Supplementary dimension of folding

Radicle chaosmos rather than root cosmos

Rats are rhizomes; burrows are too!

(Chomskian linguistic practice of parsing a sentence into noun phrase and verb phrase and the standard practice of deriving words from roots.)

Principle of Connection and Heterogeneity

            Any point of rhizome must be connected to any other and must be

            A rhizome ceaselessly establishes connection between semiotic chanins, organizations of    circumstances relative to arts, sciences and social struggles

There is no language in itself; nor are there any linguistic universals, only a throng of dialects, patios, slangs and specialized languages. There is no ideal speaker-listener, any more than there is a homogeneous linguistic community. Language is .... an essentially heterogeneous entity. There is no mother tongue, only a power takeover by a dominant language within a political multiplicity... A language is never closed upon itself, except as a function of impotence

            (Further critique of linguistics and its assumptions as a discipline)

Principle of Multiplicity

            Ceases to have any relation to the One as

·         Subject or object

·         Natural or spiritual reality

·         Image or world

There is no unity to serve as a pivot in the object or to divide in the subject

A multiplicity is neither subject not object, only determinations, magnitudes and dimensions that cannot increase in number without multiplicity changing in nature

Assemblage – an increase in dimensions

(Who controls puppets? Should we stop at the artists or extend to his nerve fibres? Will that not be an increase in dimension?)

There are no points or positions in a rhizome, such as those found in a Structure, Tree or Root. There are only lines

(Structures – societies, civilizations, system;

Tree or Root – evolutionary schemas, linguistic derivations

Root – origins and beginnings, tendency to start everything at the beginning)

(Is this a comment on the human understanding of the world? A comment  on the human knowledge and its history?)

Concepts are lines

All multiplicities are flat, n Dimensional, Asubjective and Asignifying

It is an asignifying rupture  

(Knowledge trying to explain everything about anything and saying ‘this is all it is about it’. Knowledge seems to offer full explanations leaving little for doubt. It’s too confident)

Segmentarity

Aparallel evolution

RHIZOME IS ANTI GENEALOGY

Principle of Cartography and Decalcomania

            A rhizome is a stranger to any idea of genetic axis and deep structure

“TRACING” – the tree articulates and hierarchizes tracings; tracings are like the leaves of a tree

A rhizome is a map and not a tracing

Rhizome has multiple entry ways. A map has multiple entry ways as opposed to the tracing which always comes back to the same point. The map has to do with performance whereas tracing always involves alleged competence

SCHIZOANALYSIS – rejects any idea of pretraced destiny, whatever name is given to it – divine, anagogic, historical, economic, structural, hereditary and syntagmatic

SUBJECTIFICATION OF AFFECTS

There exist tree or root structures in rhizomes; conversely, a tree branch or root division may begin to burgeon into a rhizome. The coordinates are determined not by theoretical analyses implying universals but by a pragmatics composing multiplicities or aggregates of intensities. A new rhizome may form in the heart of a tree, the hollow of a root, the crook of a branch

We are tired of trees. We should stop believing in tree, roots and radicles. They have made us suffer too much. All of the arborescent culture is founded on them, from Biology to Linguistics to Psychoanalysis

Thought is not arborescent, and the brain is not a rooted or ramified matter

Grass / couch grass

Arborescent systems are hierarchical systems with centres of significance and subjectification, central automata like organized memories... such systems pre-exist the individual, who is integrated into it at an allotted place (significance and subjectification)

To CENTERED  SYSTEMS authors propose a contrast of ACENTERED SYSTEMS/FINITE NETWORKS OF AUTOMATA in which communication runs from any neighbour to the any other, the stems and channels do not pre-exist, and all individuals are interchangeable, defined only by their state at a given moment – such that the local operations are coordinated and the final, global result synchronized without a central agency

DON’T REDUCE BUT PRODUCE

            The tree has dominated all Western reality and thought

            WEED leads the most satisfactory life of all

            Don’t go for the root, follow the canal

There is no universal capitalism, there is no capitalism in itself; capitalism is at the crossroads of all kinds of formations, it is neo capitalism by nature. It invents its eastern face and western face, and reshapes them both...

KNOTS OF ARBORESCENCE IN RHIZOMES AND RHIZOMATIC OFFSHOOTS IN ROOTS

ROOT TREE – CANAL RHIZOME are not two opposed models: the first operates as a transcendental model and tracing, even if it engenders its own escapes; the second operates as an immanent process that overturns the model and outlines a map, even if it constitutes its own hierarchies, even if it gives rise to a despotic channel

AN ANEXACTITUDE

            In the middle/ between things/ interbeing

            TREE – verb- ‘to be’

            RHIZOME – conjunction – ‘and, and, and...’

            Establish a logic of the ‘AND’