THE JOURNAL OF A GROUP ANALYZING THE POWER MECHANISMS WHICH PRODUCE AND MAINTAIN THE PRESENT DIVISIONS OF KNOWLEDGE. Anti-Oedipus From Psychoanalysis to Schizopolitics semiotextte ANTI-OEDIPUS "Beneath the beach, the paving stones ... " SEMIOTEXT(E) 522 Philosophy Hall Columbia University New York, N.Y. 10027 SEMIOTEXT(E) is the self·supporting, non-profit journal of a group ana­ lyzing the power mechanisms which produce and maintain the present divisions of knowledge (psychoanalysis, Linguistics, Literature, Philosophy and Semiotics). Editorial Committee: Denis Hollier, James Leigh, Sylvere Lotringer (General Editor), Roger McKeon, John Rajchman (Secretary), Michel Rosenfeld. Art Editor: Gil Eisner. Managing Editor: Thomas Gora. Assistant Editor: Patrick Truhn. Translating Staff (All the translations published here have been reviewed by fue following): Joe Cassidy; Eliza Ghil; Patrizia Lombardo; Roger McKeon (Translation Editor); Myungsun Pack; Michel Rosenfeld. Production Staff: Joe Cassidy; Elspeth Fraser; Susan Fletcher; Eliza Ghil; Wayne Guymon; Georgina Horvafu; Betty Kane; Louis Marvick; Eileen Mul­ lady; Dan Moshenberg; Lang-Hoan Pham; Sylvie Richards; Addie Russo. Special Editor: Sylvere Lotringer. Benefactors: Gerard Bucher, Kathleen Duda, Sylvere Lotringer, David Neiger, John Rajchman, Pamela TytelL Sponsors; Ann Bowers, Ian Bowers, Susan Flato, Wayne Guymon, Mia Lotrin­ geT, Michel Ribalka. {Contributions of $50.00 or more are listed as Benefactors and $25.00 as Sponsors. Allcontributions are tax-deductable.] Individual Subscriptions: $7.50 per volume; Institutions: $18.00. Three issues comprise one volume. Add $2.00 per volume for surface mail outside the U.S. and Canada. Check should be made payable to Semiotext{e), Inc. Semiotext(e) is indexed in MLA Bibliography and French XX Bibliography. Please check Our forthcoming issues and write to the Special Editor. All manuscripts should be accompanied by a stamped self-addressed envelope. Cover Gil Eisner © by Semiolext(e), Inc. 1977 SEMIOTEXT(E) ANTI-OEDIPUS VOLUME II NUMBER 3,1977 Sylvere LOTRINGER Libido Unbound: the Politics of 'Schizophrenia' 5 Jean-Fran�ois L YOT ARD Energumen Capitalism 11 Jacques DONZELOT , An Anti-Sociology 27 John RAJCHMAN Analysis in Power .........., , ...... , , , ,. ,. ,. .. 45 Antonin ARTAUD The Body is the Body .. ' ,...... ,... ,. ,.. ,. .. .. 59 To Have Done with the Judgment of God .... ,.,'." , 61 Felix GUATTARI Mary Barnes' Trip .. ,. ,. ,........ ,... ,..... , .. , .. 62 Freudo-Marxism , ....................... ,. .. 72 Psychoanalysis and Schi�oanalysis ., .. .. .. .. .. .. 76 Everybody Wants To Be a Fascist .., . , ... , .. ,.. , .. ,. 86 Gilles DELEUZE , , , , .. , ........ ,. ,... , ... , 99 Three Group Problems . I Have Nothing To Admit .., ... ,................ " 110 DELEUZEjGUATTARI Balance Sheet-Program for Desiring-Machines ..., .. ,.. 117 May 14, 1914. One or Several Wolves, . , ....... , , . .. 136 Guy HOCQUENGHEM Family, Capitalism, Anus ., .................., ... , 148 Robert DYER/R.A. BRINKLEY ... returns home (Mythologies, Dialectics, Structures): . ...... ... .. .. ... ... Disruptions . .. 159 Sylvere LOTRINGER The Fiction of Analysis 173 ......... ... ... .... .... ... Index . 190 Back Issues . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 191 . ... ... ... .. .... 192 Forthcoming Issues .. ... ... .. .. ... Francis Picabia: "Machine Turn Quickly" (1916�1918) Inscribed top "Machine Tournez Vite"; 1.1. "1 Femme/ 2 Homme" Libido Unbound: The Politics of 'Schizophrenia' SYLVERE LOT RINGER "If Marxism and Psychoanalysis are the two big losers of the last fifteen years, it is not so much that they sold themselves to the class in power, but that they participated in the very mechanisms of power" -Michel Foucault (1975) If Anti·Oedipus* had merely thrown psychoanalysis into question, as its title would seem to indicate, it would never have aroused in France the kind of passionate attention to which some of the pieces collected here attest. Since its inception the psychoanalytical establishment has undergone quite a number of attacks, but it always managed to modify its make-up som�what, like the flu virus, in order to outlive the more powerful antidotes. The American Ego-psychology gradually ensheathed itself in a neo�behav� iorist chain-mail which tied down intra-familial behavior to the theory of communication. Interpretative power maintained its grip on the sly, through binary logic. On the other side of the Atlantic, old Freudianism, which hadn't quite made it the first time, grew a second, more glorious, skin by jumping on the band wagon of Structuralism. Linguistics helped thereafter to justify the "return to Freud" advocated by Jacques Lacan. Oedipus and castration were turned into incontrovertible scientific truths and the uncon­ scious into an object of pure knowledge reserved strictly for techno­ academics. This is why Deleuze and Guattari felt it necessary to direct in response the brunt of their first attack against psychoanalysis and "psycho­ analysism" (ef. Jacques Donzelot: "An Antisociology"). PROJECT FOR A REVOLUTION IN NEW YORK Yet the real scope of their attempt is to be found elsewhere, in the more general title of Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Psychoanalysis is the specific, yet restrictive, application-point of a reflection that actually en­ dorses the entire economy, libidinal as well as political, of industrial societies. After the battering dealt to psychoanalysis by Wilhelm Reich, it is the whole problem of the relationship of desire to the sphere of social forces that Deleuze and Guattari attempt to recast here in a new light. Anti-Oedipus comes to us in the wake of May '68, at a time when the radicalism of the 60s seems to have vanished, or rather has exhausted the "'Capitalism and Schizophrenia: Anti-Oedipus, by Gilles Deleuze & FtHix Guattari (trans­ lated by Robert Hurley, Helen R. Lane and Mark Seem), A Richard Seaver Book, the Viking Press: New York, 1977. 5 Lotringer most expedient and all-encompassing forms it assumed in the conditions of acute sociowpolitical crisis (civil rights, Vietnam war, etc.). Economic neu* rosis, carefully entertained and exploited, now prevails. At the micro.political level, though, some powerful energy is still stirring blindly for change and it is precisely in this respect that Anti�Oedipus can be put to good use. Its originality on the French scene resides also in the fact that instead of grudgingly remaining, as Jean-Paul Sartre had to do, the uneasy bedfellow of bureaucratic socialism, it turns somewhat paradoxically towards the United States to discover another face of revolution. That which can no longer be expected from socialist countries appears suddenly at the very heart of the capitalist maelstrom. America, with its free.floating and shifting borders, its impenitent pragmatism and its unrestrained energy affords a better viewpoint on modern industrial societies than most European countries, such as France, which have long been sedentary and centralized. The gamble of Anti-Oedipus is to reformulate revolutionary perspectives from the strong points, and the weak links, of capitalism. No longer moving against the grain, but rather pushing the logic of Kapital further than it ever allowed itself to be led-to its breaking poin 1. THE NEUROTIC SMOKE-SCREEN "Those who suffer from the Oedipus-complex are not sick, they make up the quasi-totality of the people. To the contrary, isolated and affected as I am by simplex anti-oedipus, I could, paraphrasing Saint-Theresa, howl like a banshee that I suffer not to suffer. .." -Rene Crevel, Etes·vous taus? (1929) Freud never considered the relationships of desire and society except in terms of de-sexualization: sublimated homosexuality remains for him the very cement of social cohesion (Cf. Guy Hocquenghem: "Family, Capitalism, Anus"). Furthermore he explicitly recognized modern society as essentially repressive, and consequently bound and bounded to neurosis. If neurosis is the intrinsic law, the nonn of all industrial societies, who can deliver us from this normality? Surely not psychoanalysis, which cures less than it regulates neurosis for the simple reason that, in the fmal analysis, psychoanalysis and neurosis are two sides of the same coin. Who then? Vertiginous moment: if normality is abnormal, then the very notion of "patient" begins to vacillate. Nevertheless Freud concludes: "As regards the therapeutic application of our knowledge, what would be the use of the most correct analysis of social neuroses, since no one possesses authority to impose such a therapy upon the group?" (Ovilization and its Discontents). The therapeutic contract is a social contract: the analyst derives his power·to-cure from society. From here on, no one can wrest SOciety from its neurosis. "But in spite of these difficulties," Freud adds, for the sake of argument, Hwe may expect that one day someone will venture to embark upon a pathology of cultural communities." We surely need a 6 Libido Un bound: The Politics of <Schizophrenia' Superman for such a superanalysis. Unless analysis can dissociate itself from any authority ... Freud's reasoning relies on certain presuppositions that should be elucidate d if we are to escape this apparent impasse: (1) There exists a "correct," objective, disinterested knowledge of man; (2) TIris knowledge can be "applied" or not according to the authority with wltich one is invested; (3) There should be an appointed representative who will "impose" the therapy onto the group. (4) Social pathology is defined,