Gilles Deluze

The phenomenology of the unfolding elaboration of our capacity to know Being directly and as well as our experience to know Being through beings is the focus of this paper. I will focus on the phenomenological elaboration of our knowing of mind; the phenomenological knowing of direct awareness and the consequent simultaneous intertwining of knowing through mind and through awareness. This union of our mind and our awareness allows the knowing of Being through beings and knowing the indivisibleness of beings and Being. As the Dakini said to Dudjom Lingpa " You and I are indivisible. " Our paper begins with a phenomenological elaboration of the Two Ways of Knowing. This is a necessary and a most useful distinction for our knowing of both beings and Being simultaneously. The Two Ways of Knowing: Mind Knowing Form and Awareness Knowing Being Mind Knows Form! Our mind knows forms, and things, both subtle and gross. Our mind knows beings and things. Our mind knows subject and our mind knows otherness. Our mind knows dualities .Our mind knows me and you, us and them and this and that. Mind knows time. Our mind knows the sense of the past, the sense of present and a sense of the future. The mind knows entities. Our mind knows difference. Our mind thinks conceptually, feels affectively, imagines through images, the mind senses sensation and the mind has memory. The mind always knows dualistically. Our mind thinks and knows through thoughts, our mind feels and knows through feelings, our mind has sensations, knows through sensation and our mind has fantasy and knows through imagination. The knowledge of our mind is mediated through conceptualization and representational thinking. Our mind can even know the mind of others. However, our mind cannot know Being and our mind cannot know the Being-ness of beings. Our mind cannot experience Being. Our mind cannot know Being directly. Awareness Knows Being! Our awareness directly knows Being and our awareness can directly know the Being-ness of beings. Being itself is not a being and Being manifests beings, infinite numbers of beings. Being manifests Being within beings as their own being. Being itself is not an entity and Being is not a being. Being is not a thing. Being is non-duality. Being knows the non-duality of everything and anything. Being is oneness and pervasiveness. Being is openness, and Being self-manifests as radiant light. Being is compassionate creative resonance. Being manifests presence. Our awareness can know the indivisible presence of the Being-ness of beings within beings and between beings. Being manifests duality, although Being is completely non-dual. By becoming aware of awareness, we experience primordial awareness which is the ground of being, which is Being itself. Awareness is Being. Awareness is Being knowing Being. Being knows Being and is the Being-ness of all the beings. Awareness can be timeless as well as awareness can be in time. Awareness can be timelessness and in time simultaneously.

To designate Dracula as a vampire novel would by no means constitute a false representation; the text does, on a molar level, deal with the vampire. However, this classification misdiagnoses the conflict that drives the novel, a conflict which instead deals in the becoming-vampire, among other becomings. Essentially, Dracula relies more on the vampiric than the vampire. By performing the vampiric act of infection—turning the familiar into a terrifying other—Dracula threatens to usurp the patriarchal structure at the center of the novel. This paper conducts a reexamination of the vampiric through the concept of ‘becoming’ as articulated in A Thousand Plateaus, a critical lens that facilitates new insight into gender issues in Dracula. Reframing the vampiric as ‘becoming’ generates the possibility that it might be redeemed as an alternative to the patriarchal.

Immigrant adolescent male students and their identity negotiation remain under-examined in the field of language and literacy education research. This paper reports on a classroom discourse study examining the relationship between masculinity performances and language learning of one immigrant boy, Tiger, in one ESL classroom. Using discourse analysis of classroom interactions , field notes, and documents, I illustrate that Tiger stylized his L2 speech and appropriated the classroom language practice to perform a funny and "laddish" masculinity. I theorize his L2 stylization as "doing funny," a discursive practice of performing a dominant form of masculinity to gain hegemonic power and an act of subverting the routinized and nonengaging language instruction for identity performance. His masculinity performances, deeply intertwined with the interactional process of teaching and learning of language, conflicted with the instructional goals set by the teacher, ultimately leading to him being identified as a "problem" student. This study underscores the need for teachers to be cognizant of the complexity in multilingual young men's masculinity negotiation, to recognize the interdependence of identity performances and language learning, to disrupt boys' internalized notions of masculinity, and to decenter the power and control between the student, the teacher, and the school.

In Deleuze’s treatments of Nietzsche’s amor fati and of Stoic fatalism, we find a temporal structure that couples logically incompatible elements, namely, chance and destiny in the first case and will and fate in the second. In Deleuze’s accounts, it is by means of a particular sort of affirmational activity that allows our immediate, present temporality – during which chance and willful action reign – to intersect with an eternal sort of temporality that houses our fate and destiny and that thus lies outside our immediate grasp. To understand this combination of incompatible temporalities in Deleuze’s philosophy, we will employ paraconsistent reasoning, which allows us to affirm both the truth and falsity of some proposition, or, construed another way, it allows us to dually affirm both a proposition and its paraconsistent negation. We thereby will consider these temporal structures as involving “dialetheias” (true contradictions). Under this view, we will also explore a dialetheic interpretation of Deleuze’s notions of the powers of the false, from his writings on Nietzsche, and of prohairesis (“volition”) and Aiôn and Chronos, from his writings on the Stoics.
It is important to emphasize in a Deleuzian context that paraconsistent negation in such contradictory formulations bears a critically different logical property from classical negation, namely, it does not cancel, “destroy,” or exclude what it negates. This is because negation is distinct from denial in paraconsistent reasoning: we do not both affirm and deny the same proposition; rather, we affirm both its truth and falsity. Thus by means of this paraconsistent mode of reasoning, we can implement a logical structure that is suitable to the sorts of affirmative synthetic disjunctions involved in Deleuze’s logically complex temporal structures. This in the end enables us to understand how for Deleuze we may affirm our fate while also influencing the directions that the present develops toward.

This paper dealt mainly with the condition of language, both internalized and externalized, at the age of globalization as well as Electronic capitalism by reiterating earlier stands taken by Bandyopadhyay(1999a, 1999b, 2000). It starts with a Marxian metaphor of inversion (in case of commodity fitishism) that lead us to the understanding of the nature of inversion of language and creative speaking subject as well. Different spaces of communication (in the Indian context) was introduced in Sec-3 with a view to understand the cyber-spatial hyper-reality vis a vis other spaces of communication (Indian grass-root plurilingualism, administrative use of language and Business language). Sec-3 had different subsections that briefly deal with (a) “inner domain” of Indian plurilingualism (3.1); (b) language of Indian administration (3.2) and (c) Language of National and Multinational business sectors (3.3 and 3.4). In 3.4.2, the Social Scientific and Environmental scientific problems of Computational Linguistics (CL) was discussed as CL is now creating a cyber-zone of communication with a view to create speaking machine and computer is the repertoire of large language-data. Sec-3.4.3 was on the encroachment/cohabitation of centre's language in the so-called "local" language and 3.4.4 will conclusively summarize the theme of the Sec-3, i.e. use of Externalized language in the "Glocalized" (=global+local) society keeping in mind the “Indian” context. Sec-4 shifted to the problem of Internalized Language. Here the hypothesis of crippled creativity was introduced by attesting the locus (i.e. the cyberspace) of “ideal” speaking subject. According to this hypothesis, linguistic creativity is crippled by the outside sociality and the creative speaking subject is ceased to be existed in the world of behavioral manipulation. Lastly, in Sec-5, the "Art of resistance" was discussed. In this last section, the Marxian metaphor of inversion in the context of market economy was inverted again with the logic of double negation to achieve the scope for emancipatory dialogue without manipulation. However this Habermasian agenda of achieving communicative competence was again questioned by the author as a transcendental locus for dialogue would not to be found in the planet earth.

It  is  my  claim  that  Gilles  Deleuze’s  expressionism  allows  for a new  theory  and  praxis  of  reading called  Immanent  Reading,  different  from  both  his  own  Schizoanalytic  praxis  and  the referential and  ontological  theories  informing  Literary  Theory.  Immanent  reading,  I  propose,  following Colebrook’s  readings  of  Deleuze,  offers  an  ethics  of  reading  emphasising  the  pure  immediacy  of relations,  including  those  expressed  by  life.  It  is  upon  this  primary  vector  that this  thesis progresses:  the  broad  articulation  and  creation  of  a theory  of Immanent  Reading.  To  achieve this,  I  claim  that  the  expressionist  metaphysics  exposed  by  Deleuze  in  Spinoza  and  Leibniz is altered  by  Deleuze  in  his  own  conceptual  creations  (as  with  becoming  and  immanence)  and persists  as  a properly  Deleuzian  expressionism.  The  degrees  of  expression  I  propose  belong  to immanent  reading  are,  without  necessary  order,  the written-body,  the  reader-body,  and  a milieu of  becoming that  composes  them  together and  transforms  their  affective  and  perceptive compositions.  The written-body  distinguishes  itself  as  a creation  of percepts  and  affects  in writing,  the  reader-body  through  its  involvement  of  pliable  perceptions  and  affections,  and becoming through  its  transformative capacity  on  these affective and  perceptive  complexes.  The concept  of  immanence  subtends  this  expressive  composition,  drawing reading into  pure immediacy  while  articulating  it  as  a process  of unnatural encounters  for  “a  Life”.  To  avoid representations  of  life in  demonstrating  the praxis,  this  thesis  engages  with  speculative literature.  Deleuze  has  made  use  of  speculative  writers,  such  as  Lovecraft  and  Asimov,  to  create his  (with  and  without  Guattari and  Parnet)  concept  of  becoming.  Here  I  engage  with  Le  Guin, McCarthy,  and  Stanley  Robinson  amongst  others.  The  consequence  of  composing  an  encounter with  speculative  literature  for immanent  reading  is  multi-fold,  with  this  thesis  theorising  an expressionist  logic  in  the  creation  of  speculative  sensations  and  the  becomings  they  herald.



Available on request

This paper deals with real-hyperreal duality in the context of proliferation of Electronic Capitalism and its subsequent death industry, unusually depending on some facts and fictions, which are strictly discouraged as well as disallowed within the strict format or Procrustean bed (Prokrustes is a giant in the Greek mythology, Damastes or otherwise, who laid all human beings on his bed and then “lop them or rack them out to make fit it.”) of dominant scientific writing. I apologize for such inconvenient way of representation as I am writing an obituary of the grave incident of real death in contrast with the imaginary world of fairytale economy as proposed by the prosperous masters (sexism intended) of the universe.

For the facts, I am depending on the report of Andhra-suicides published in the Frontline (27 April, 2001) and treat that exposition as a real discourse and on the other hand, this paper will deal with the hyperreal as constructed by those masters of the universe. Lastly, it also depends on “imagined” fictions by Manik Bandyopadhyay and Samaresh Basu. This difference between these facts and fictions is often fuzzy as Chakrovorty Spivak(1997:76) aptly said that the difference is “in degree rather than in kind”. These real facts and fictions will be placed against the hyperreal simulated world of development to understand its immediate consequence, the death industry.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 16

Keywords: Hyperreal, suicide as a market fact, simulation, death industry