It is very hard to explain oneself - an interview, a dialogue, a conversation. Most of the time, when someone asks me a question, even one which relates to me, I see that, strictly, I dont have anything to say. Questions are invented, like anything else. If you arent allowed to invent your questions, with elements from all over the place, from never mind where, if people pose them to you, you havent much to say. The art of constructing a problem is very important: you invent a problem, a problem-position, before finding a solution. None of this happens in an interview, a conversation, a discussion. Even reflection, whether its alone, or between two or more, is not enough. Above all, not reflection. Objections are even worse. Every time someone puts an objection to me, I want to say: OK, OK, lets go on to something else. Objections have never contributed anything. Its the same when I am asked a general question. The aim is not to answer questions, its to get out, to get out of it. Many people think that it is only by going back over the question that its possible to get out of it. What is the position with philosophy? Is it dead? Are we going beyond it? Its very trying. They wont stop returning to the question in order to get out of it. But getting out never happens like that. Movement always happens behind the thinkers back, or in the moment when he blinks. Getting out is already achieved or else it never will be. (Dialogues II by Deleuze & Claire Parnet), 1987, p. 1)
Posted on: Sun, 09 Nov 2014 21:55:12 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015