Close Reading of AO... begins now
Since nobody returned by post about going in a linear fashion through AO, or in a mish-mash non-linear fashion haphazardly, I decided I'll kick things off in a linear fashion. It will make things easier... if that's possible with a book like Anti-Oedipus.
So the first thing to think about with the book is the painting, Boy With Machine. Reminiscent of the Fragment on Machines by Karl Marx, which we have discussed at length in earlier posts. Its a sign of poesis, or production and creation of the self through machines. The boy is linked to the machine. His body is bound up with the machine. So its not a matter of thinking that "i produce therefore I am" but rather that all of existence is only possible through a process of production, production is being, and this production can only be facilitated through an inter-connection between man and machine, which ultimately blurs this distinction altogether. Michael Hardt begins his notes on AO by saying, "All is machines". That is, all production is created by machines, all existence is inextricably bound to machines, and all forms of social production, communication, and inter-subjective relations are inherently mediated by machines. This is a big thesis, but its a great place to start understanding what is at stake in this book. They are not saying that machines are useful, or helpful, or harmful, or even making a case about whether or not they are necessary, but that they are saying that mechanization has occurred to the point where no human existence would be possible without machines, and in fact maybe it has always been this way. So they are postulating a certain type of "techne", or what Heidegger called thinking that is in the service of making and doing. Which is akin to and facilitated by technical thinking, thinking as a machine, being as a machine.
So the first thing to think about with the book is the painting, Boy With Machine. Reminiscent of the Fragment on Machines by Karl Marx, which we have discussed at length in earlier posts. Its a sign of poesis, or production and creation of the self through machines. The boy is linked to the machine. His body is bound up with the machine. So its not a matter of thinking that "i produce therefore I am" but rather that all of existence is only possible through a process of production, production is being, and this production can only be facilitated through an inter-connection between man and machine, which ultimately blurs this distinction altogether. Michael Hardt begins his notes on AO by saying, "All is machines". That is, all production is created by machines, all existence is inextricably bound to machines, and all forms of social production, communication, and inter-subjective relations are inherently mediated by machines. This is a big thesis, but its a great place to start understanding what is at stake in this book. They are not saying that machines are useful, or helpful, or harmful, or even making a case about whether or not they are necessary, but that they are saying that mechanization has occurred to the point where no human existence would be possible without machines, and in fact maybe it has always been this way. So they are postulating a certain type of "techne", or what Heidegger called thinking that is in the service of making and doing. Which is akin to and facilitated by technical thinking, thinking as a machine, being as a machine.