Meltdown (1994) sees Nick Land dissolve the posthuman future in a solvent of technocapital, continental philosophy, cyberpunk, bacterial warfare and retrotemporal attraction, all dressed up in implanted mirrorshades with a highly-cinematic 9mm.
Forget "nature" metaphysically for Land there are only flows of different quantity and quality (which is also quantity). It's these flows that are constantly coded, decoded and recoded. It's all production. capital isnt a "natural" force according to land it's a deterritorializing force which he gets from Deleuze but seeks to speed up that process by encouraging it. Thats why the bwo is so crucial because it's the "surface" on which deterritorialization and reterritorialization happen. Also, another critical point is that culture doesn't collapse into the economy theyre the same thing, just two sides of the same productive force.
I (Jack) have been engaging more with D&G after recording this episode, which has helped, although I definitely need to look into it more.
Regarding you describing capital as not 'natural', is this in the sense that coding gives something its 'nature' or being, and capital, as a deterritorialising force, undermines this?
Now that I think about it more, I guess it depends how youre using "natural". I was trying to emphasize that it's not a static thing but rather a force which is dynamic, processual and productive. It codes, decodes and recodes. Coding congeals the force and directs flows while deterritorialization breaks down and frees those flows. Capital is a force by which deterritorialization and then subsequent reterritorialization occur. It does both.
For DnG their metaphysical position is that everything is just forces. His metaphysics is largely pulled from Spinoza with Nietzsche's idea of will to power mixed in.
It's such a headache to get into especially without a philosophy background so I respect you all for tackling it. Nietzsche and Philosophy by just Deleuze sets the stage for a lot of this but if you don't want to read all that he has an essay in Pure Immanence on Nietzsche which in imo is his most distilled presentation of his metaphysics. Also if youre going through anti-oedipus the book, 'Deleuze and Guattari's Anti-Oedipus" by Eugene W. Holland is incredibly helpful. Massumi has a book too but I personally didn't like it as much.
I got halfway through Difference and Repetition before having to take a break (felt like I was going insane), so I'll either try to bulldoze through the latter half of that, or just read the essay in Pure Immanence that you recommended. I'll likely end up reading Anti-Oedipus or A Thousand Plateaus at some stage, will probably understand about 5% of it. Thanks for the reccs, I'll definitely look into those.
That essay will probably help a little with difference and repetition since that book is still more him doing rigid philosophy. I haven’t read it yet though tbh. Also with anti-oedipus don’t bother trying to understand every line. You’re not supposed to. Just read it as lit tbh. You’ll go insane trying. There’s also so many uncited references in there that even Badiou said he’d never be able to get them all.
I look forward to hearing you all discuss it in the future.
Appreciate it. If you ever decide to discuss some anarchist works like those by Stirner or Novatore lmk. Or Bataille since he’s been my main interest for the past decade or so. The impossible, erotism, Limit of the Useful (recent), or Literature and Evil are all rarely talked about but are essential to understanding his thought. Even psychological structures of fascism shows the intention of his project.
Forget "nature" metaphysically for Land there are only flows of different quantity and quality (which is also quantity). It's these flows that are constantly coded, decoded and recoded. It's all production. capital isnt a "natural" force according to land it's a deterritorializing force which he gets from Deleuze but seeks to speed up that process by encouraging it. Thats why the bwo is so crucial because it's the "surface" on which deterritorialization and reterritorialization happen. Also, another critical point is that culture doesn't collapse into the economy theyre the same thing, just two sides of the same productive force.
I (Jack) have been engaging more with D&G after recording this episode, which has helped, although I definitely need to look into it more.
Regarding you describing capital as not 'natural', is this in the sense that coding gives something its 'nature' or being, and capital, as a deterritorialising force, undermines this?
Now that I think about it more, I guess it depends how youre using "natural". I was trying to emphasize that it's not a static thing but rather a force which is dynamic, processual and productive. It codes, decodes and recodes. Coding congeals the force and directs flows while deterritorialization breaks down and frees those flows. Capital is a force by which deterritorialization and then subsequent reterritorialization occur. It does both.
For DnG their metaphysical position is that everything is just forces. His metaphysics is largely pulled from Spinoza with Nietzsche's idea of will to power mixed in.
It's such a headache to get into especially without a philosophy background so I respect you all for tackling it. Nietzsche and Philosophy by just Deleuze sets the stage for a lot of this but if you don't want to read all that he has an essay in Pure Immanence on Nietzsche which in imo is his most distilled presentation of his metaphysics. Also if youre going through anti-oedipus the book, 'Deleuze and Guattari's Anti-Oedipus" by Eugene W. Holland is incredibly helpful. Massumi has a book too but I personally didn't like it as much.
I got halfway through Difference and Repetition before having to take a break (felt like I was going insane), so I'll either try to bulldoze through the latter half of that, or just read the essay in Pure Immanence that you recommended. I'll likely end up reading Anti-Oedipus or A Thousand Plateaus at some stage, will probably understand about 5% of it. Thanks for the reccs, I'll definitely look into those.
That essay will probably help a little with difference and repetition since that book is still more him doing rigid philosophy. I haven’t read it yet though tbh. Also with anti-oedipus don’t bother trying to understand every line. You’re not supposed to. Just read it as lit tbh. You’ll go insane trying. There’s also so many uncited references in there that even Badiou said he’d never be able to get them all.
I look forward to hearing you all discuss it in the future.
If you want to come on and discuss a book, just let us know. Open invitation.
Appreciate it. If you ever decide to discuss some anarchist works like those by Stirner or Novatore lmk. Or Bataille since he’s been my main interest for the past decade or so. The impossible, erotism, Limit of the Useful (recent), or Literature and Evil are all rarely talked about but are essential to understanding his thought. Even psychological structures of fascism shows the intention of his project.