Dark Deleuze recovers the forgotten negativity that impregnates Deleuze’s collected works. This negativity has affinities with Walter Benjamin’s destructive character and Maurice Blanchot’s great refusal. The book Dark Deleuze proceeds by way of close reading, with particular attention to his characteristic ambivalence as seen in his use of de-, a-, in-, and non-prefixes. The result is a series of ‘contraries,’ which offer alternative terms to the canon of joy. The ‘contrary’ in this sense is an alternative to be taken, such as a fork in the road rather than a tendential opposite, dialectical antimony, or complementary pole – to name all seventeen, a philosophical task of “destroying worlds” in contrast to “creating concepts,” a theory of the subject of “un-becoming” in contrast to “assemblages,” an analysis of existence through “transformation” in contrast to “genesis,” an ontology derived from “materialism” in contrast to “realism,” a use of difference as “exclusive disjunction” in contrast to “inclusive disjunction,” a diagrammatics of “asymmetry” in contrast to “complexity,” a form of organization of “asymmetry” in contrast to “the rhizome,” an ethics of “conspiratorical communism” in contrast to “processural democracy,” an analysis of affects of “cruelty” in contrast to “intensity,” an inquiry into speed as “escape” in contrast to “acceleration,” a theory of flows as “interruption” in contrast to “production,” a focus on the substance of “political anthropology” in contrast to “techno-science,” a nomadism of the “barbarian” in contrast to the “pastoral,” a distribution of “the outside” in contrast to “nomos,” a politics of “cataclysm” in contrast to “the molecular,” a cinema of “the power of the false” in contrast to “the force of bodies,” and a theory of the sensible as “indiscernibility” in contrast to “experience.”

Source: https://alienocene.files.wordpress.com/201...