## Jakub Zdebik (2012). *Deleuze and the Diagram: Aesthetic Threads in Visual Organization*. : Continuum. > [!INFO] > Type:: [[book]] > Title:: Deleuze and the Diagram: Aesthetic Threads in Visual Organization > Author(s): [[Jakub Zdebik]] > Year:: 2012 > Tags:: > DOI:: > Citekey:: zdebik_deleuze_2012 > ZoteroURI:: [Open in Zotero: Deleuze and the Diagram: Aesthetic Threads in Visual Organization](zotero://select/items/@zdebik_deleuze_2012) > ReviewedDate:: [[2021-03-28]] ## Citation ```latex [@zdebik_deleuze_2012] ``` ## Related ```dataview TABLE file.aliases AS "Title" FROM [[@zdebik_deleuze_2012]] and -"Plans" and -"resources" ``` ## Summary - ## Notes: **What Is a Diagram?** - From the Greek *diagramma*, it means to mark out by lines, to draw – where *dia*is through, across, apart and *graphein*is to write. The diagram is defined as a geometrical figure used to illustrate theorems (공리 원리). - basically, delineating its inner workings. - Finally, a diagram can be defined as a chart or a graph explain- ing or illustrating ideas and displaying statistics. - 다이아그램은 세가지 다른 드로잉 타입으로 나타난다. - a plan, a map and a graph (or a schema) - 플랜은 아직 지어지지 않은 건물을 나타낸다. - 지도는 아직 여행되어 지지 않은 terrains를 타나낸다. - 그래프는 displays relations between variable **quantities**. - 어떤 타입으로 나타나건 (representation) a diagram is a configuration of lines, whether they are drawn or written. - In a conceptual diagram, the lines marking out a space are abstract traits. - The diagram thus does not represent, but rather maps out possibilities prior to their appearance, their representation. - 그러므로 다이아그램은 재현하지 않는다. 오히려 스스로의 출현에 앞선 가능성이며 스스로의 재현이다. This new dimension lies between the visible and the articulable, and therefore traits are not exactly pictures or written language. - The diagram does not resemble particular elements in an imitative way; rather, it displays abstract functions that make up a system. - 다이아그램의 컨셉은 hylomorphic 이론을 수정시키며 — 폼과 매터가 밀고 당기는 — 내용과 표현의 관계 사이 또한 변화시킨다. 사고와 이미지, 그리고 재현과 비재현 사이 또한 이어지게 만든다. - The concept of the diagram revamps hylemorphic theory – the push and pull between form and matter – as well as the relationship between con- tent and expression, the connection between thought and image, and the difference between representation and non-representation. (1) - It also deals with organization, forces at work in social and cultural constructs; it is a way to travel from one system to another. - 이 다이아그램 이론은 길 들뢰즈가 미쉘 푸코의 영향을 받아서 만들어진 컨셉니다. ### 2 - 들뢰즈의 푸코에 대한 책에서 다이아그램은 두번 정의되는데 1. the diagram is a new informal dimension 2. it is a display of relations as pure functions. ### 3 Diagram as a new informal dimension - 들뢰즈는 두개의 다른 practical formations로 분석한다. 1. Discursive 담론적 2. non-discursive. - 논증적인 discursive 담론적 타입의 구조 formation은 스테이트먼트와 연결된다. - 예를들어 의학 메디슨이나 penal law - 이러한 담론적 포메이션은 비담론적 구조를 환경으로 해석하여 엮인다. - 예를 들어, 인스티투션 이나 감옥. - 환경은 논증적인 구조 혹은 statements 를 formations 을 determine 한다. 또 반대로 statements 는 환경을 determine 한다. - 하지만 두 구조는 different, heterogeneous 하다. - ‘Even though they may overlap: there is no correspondence, or isomorphism, no direct causality or symbolisation.’ - * Gilles Deleuze, *Foucault*, trans. Seán Hand (Minneapolis: Minnesota UP, 1995), 31. - 들뢰즈는 푸코가 어떻게 이러한 두 개의 다른 시스템의 부조화를 해결했는가 설명한다. 감옥과 형법을 예로들어 (31) - 감옥 시스템은 content가 있는 구조, 형성물이다. - thing 환경적 형성물 ➡︎ 감옥 환경 - 내용의 폼 ➡︎ content 가 죄수 - 감옥 포메이션은 기의가 되기위해 단어나 기호를 가르키지 않는다. 왜냐하면 감옥 포메이션은 그저 ‘thing’이 아니라 여러 추상적 기능들의 assemblage 이기 때문이다. - 그럼에도 비담론적 구조 (예를들어 감옥) 은 다른 incongruous(일치하지 않은) ‘thing’ (discursive formation, 형법)을 가르킨다. - The prison environment is not defined by its materiality: stone walls and prison bars. It is defined by its function: seeing without being seen. For its part, the penal law is defined by what can be articulated in language: ‘A system of light and a system of language are not the same form, and do not have the same formation.’ (들뢰즈, 푸코 32) - 여기서 들뢰즈는 두개의 질문을 던지는데 - First, what is the link between two systems in the social field that is not based on their outside forms? - And second, how do the assemblages between two heterogeneous forms come together and remain respectively varied? - 이 질문에 답하기 전에 들뢰즈는 ‘폼’에 대한 두가지 다른 의미를 분리한다. - organise matter - distribute function - 어떻게 두개의 폼의 조화, 공유성 a commonality 이 있을 수 있을까? - 그것을 우리가 pure matter 과 pure functions 를 생각하여 그 안에 있는 폼을 추상화 시킬수 있기 때문이다. - The function and matter can be, in effect, abstracted to their essential traits and connected together on that level. - Foucault gives it its most precise name: it is a “diagram”, that is to say a “functioning, abstracted from any obstacle [. . .] or friction [and which] must be detached from any specific use”.’ (Deleuze, *Foucault*, 34.) - In this way, the diagram is not merely a simple model that traces similarities between things, but is also a generative device that continues working once embodied: - The *diagram*is no longer an auditory or visual archive but a map, a cartography that is coextensive with the whole social field. It is an abstract machine. It is defined by its informal functions and matter and in terms of form makes no distinction between content and expression, a discursive formation and a non-discursive formation. It is a machine that is almost blind and mute, even though it makes others see and speak. * Deleuze, *Foucault*, 34. - The diagram makes abstracted function pass from one formation or system to the next. In this way, **it is a virtual map behind heterogeneous formation not only irreducible in its actual form, but also heterogeneous in its level of materiality**: like prison and the penal code, an architectural structure and a set of laws. - 두번째 다이아그램에 대한 정의 에서 푸코는 he focuses on the display of relations of pure function. - 건물의 요소가 아니라 그 환경 안의 사람 (간수와 죄수)의 관계를 통해서. 이 관계는 감옥의 스트럭처에 의해서 추상화 되고 다른 스트럭처로 이전될 수 있다. ➡︎ 학교, 병영 혹은 병원. - 하지만 ‘감시’는 다이아그라마틱 기능의 하나일 뿐이다. - 들뢰즈는 영지적 다이아그램 feudal diagram에 대해 적는다. * Gilles Deleuze, ‘Desire and Pleasure’, in *Two Regimes of Madness: Text and Interviews* *1975–1995*, ed. David Lapoujade, trans. Ames Hodges and Mike Taormina (New York: Semiotext(e), 2007), 125. - 나폴레옹적 다이아그람 * Deleuze, *Foucault*, 85. - 그리스의 다이아그람 * Deleuze, *Foucault*, 101. - 더 나아가 pastoral diagram. * Gilles Deleuze, ‘Michel Foucault’s Main Concepts’, in *Two Regimes of Madness:**Text and Interviews 1975–1995*, ed. David Lapoujade, trans. Ames Hodges and Mike Taormina (New York: Semiotext(e), 2007), 231. ### 6 - **들뢰즈가 말하는 다이아그램이란 무엇인가.** - the abstract function of the device. In the span of his answer, he begins with an architectural basis and ends by comparing the diagram to a map: - It is a ==display== of the relations between forces which constitute power in the above conditions: ‘The panoptic mechanism is not simply a hinge, a point of exchange between a mechanism of power and a function; it is a way of making power relations functions [*sic*] in a function, and of making a function through these power relations.’ [[[@deleuze_foucault_1988]], 36, quoted in @foucault_discipline_2012, 206-7] - 파놉틱 메카니즘은 그저 중심점이 아니라, 메카니즘의 파워와 기능이 교환되는 포인트이다. 그것은 기능 안에 기능에 관계하는 파워를 만드는 방식이다. 그리고 파워 관계를 통해서 기능을 만든다. - We have seen that the relations between forces, or power relations, were microphysical, strategic multipunctual and diffuse, that they determined particular features and constituted pure functions. ==The diagram or abstract machine is the map of relations between forces, a map of destiny, or intensity, which proceeds by primary non-localizable relations and at every moment passes through every point, ‘or rather in every relation from on point to another’.== * Deleuze, *Foucault*, 36. - it is important to note the visual element in the explanation - 위에서 번역가는 display 란 단어로 expose를 번역했는데, 이는 exhibit. 전시하다 라는 의미는 다이아그램 기능의 visual 적 기능을 암시한다. - It means *through*, *apart*, *between*and hints at the multidimensional aspect of display. - Deleuze states this clearly: ‘A diagram is a map, or rather several superimposed maps. And from one diagram to the next, new maps are drawn.’ * Deleuze, *Foucault*, 44. - 이를 통해 두가지 다이아그램 방식을 생각해볼 수 있다. 건축과 지도제작법 cartography - Peter Eisenman 의 경우 다이아그램을 통해 크레이티브 프로세스로 활용한다. - 그에게 다이아그램과 스케치 혹은 플랜을 구분된다. - The diagram, as an analytical tool, ‘attempts to uncover the latent structure of organisation’. - * Peter Eisenman, *Written into the Void: Selected Writings 1990–2004*, intro. Jeffrey Kipnis (New Haven: Yale UP, 2007), 88. - A diagram connects between the theoretical and the real stages of the construction of a building. - ::Generically, a diagram is a graphic shorthand::. Though it is an ideogram, it is not necessarily an abstraction. It is a representation of something in that it is not the thing itself. In this sense, it cannot help but be embodied. It can never be free of value or meaning, even when it attempts to express relationships of formation and their processes. At the same time, a diagram is neither a structure nor an abstraction of structure. While it explains relationships in an architectural object, it is not isomorphic with it. * Eisenman, *Written into the Void*, 88. - First is the notion of embodiment. This part of the architectural diagram is an approximate sketch that reveals a building’s overarching yet implicit structure. - 건축적 다이아그램의 차이 - must be following the path of the actual plan of the building, and a conceptual diagram, which is devoid of value and meaning because it is pure abstract function. - reveals the [[becoming]] of forms and how they function – their processes. - 이것은 structure 가 아니라 - it traces the flow of focus that are part of a rigid organisation of a particular building. ### What Is a Diagram? - From the Greek *diagramma*, it means to mark out by lines, to draw – where *dia*is through, across, apart and *graphein*is to write. The diagram is defined as a geometrical figure used to illustrate theorems (공리 원리). - basically, delineating its inner workings. - Finally, a diagram can be defined as a chart or a graph explaining or illustrating ideas and displaying statistics. - 다이아그램은 세가지 다른 드로잉 타입으로 나타난다. - a plan, a map and a graph (or a schema) - 플랜은 아직 지어지지 않은 건물을 나타낸다. - 지도는 아직 여행되어 지지 않은 terrains를 타나낸다. - 그래프는 displays relations between variable **quantities**. - 어떤 타입으로 나타나건 (representation) a diagram is a configuration of lines, whether they are drawn or written. - In a conceptual diagram, the lines marking out a space are abstract traits. - The diagram thus does not represent, but rather maps out possibilities prior to their appearance, their representation. - 그러므로 다이아그램은 재현하지 않는다. 오히려 스스로의 출현에 앞선 가능성이며 스스로의 재현이다. This new dimension lies between the visible and the articulable, and therefore traits are not exactly pictures or written language. - The diagram does not resemble particular elements in an imitative way; rather, it displays abstract functions that make up a system. - 다이아그램의 컨셉은 hylomorphic 이론을 수정시키며 — 폼과 매터가 밀고 당기는 — 내용과 표현의 관계 사이 또한 변화시킨다. 사고와 이미지, 그리고 재현과 비재현 사이 또한 이어지게 만든다. - The concept of the diagram revamps hylemorphic theory – the push and pull between form and matter – as well as the relationship between content and expression, the connection between thought and image, and the difference between representation and non-representation. [@zdebik_deleuze_2012, 1] - It also deals with organization, forces at work in social and cultural constructs; it is a way to travel from one system to another. - 이 다이아그램 이론은 길 들뢰즈가 미쉘 푸코의 영향을 받아서 만들어진 컨셉니다. #### 2 - 들뢰즈의 푸코에 대한 책에서 다이아그램은 두번 정의되는데 1. the diagram is a new informal dimension 2. it is a display of relations as pure functions. #### 3 Diagram as a new informal dimension - 들뢰즈는 두개의 다른 practical formations로 분석한다. 1. Discursive 담론적 2. non-discursive. - 논증적인 discursive 담론적 타입의 구조 formation은 스테이트먼트와 연결된다. - 예를들어 의학 메디슨이나 penal law - 이러한 담론적 포메이션은 비담론적 구조를 환경으로 해석하여 엮인다. - 예를 들어, 인스티투션 이나 감옥. - 환경은 논증적인 구조 혹은 statements 를 formations 을 determine 한다. 또 반대로 statements 는 환경을 determine 한다. - 하지만 두 구조는 different, heterogeneous 하다. - ‘Even though they may overlap: there is no correspondence, or isomorphism, no direct causality or symbolisation.’ - * Gilles Deleuze, *Foucault*, trans. Seán Hand (Minneapolis: Minnesota UP, 1995), 31. - 들뢰즈는 푸코가 어떻게 이러한 두 개의 다른 시스템의 부조화를 해결했는가 설명한다. 감옥과 형법을 예로들어 (31) - 감옥 시스템은 content가 있는 구조, 형성물이다. - thing 환경적 형성물 ➡︎ 감옥 환경 - 내용의 폼 ➡︎ content 가 죄수 - 감옥 포메이션은 기의가 되기위해 단어나 기호를 가르키지 않는다. 왜냐하면 감옥 포메이션은 그저 ‘thing’이 아니라 여러 추상적 기능들의 assemblage 이기 때문이다. - 그럼에도 비담론적 구조 (예를들어 감옥) 은 다른 incongruous(일치하지 않은) ‘thing’ (discursive formation, 형법)을 가르킨다. - The prison environment is not defined by its materiality: stone walls and prison bars. It is defined by its function: seeing without being seen. For its part, the penal law is defined by what can be articulated in language: ‘A system of light and a system of language are not the same form, and do not have the same formation.’ (들뢰즈, 푸코 32) - 여기서 들뢰즈는 두개의 질문을 던지는데 - First, what is the link between two systems in the social field that is not based on their outside forms? - And second, how do the assemblages between two heterogeneous forms come together and remain respectively varied? - 이 질문에 답하기 전에 들뢰즈는 ‘폼’에 대한 두가지 다른 의미를 분리한다. - organise matter - distribute function - 어떻게 두개의 폼의 조화, 공유성 a commonality 이 있을 수 있을까? - 그것을 우리가 pure matter 과 pure functions 를 생각하여 그 안에 있는 폼을 추상화 시킬수 있기 때문이다. - The function and matter can be, in effect, abstracted to their essential traits and connected together on that level. - Foucault gives it its most precise name: it is a “diagram”, that is to say a “functioning, abstracted from any obstacle [. . .] or friction [and which] must be detached from any specific use”.’ (Deleuze, *Foucault*, 34.) - In this way, the diagram is not merely a simple model that traces similarities between things, but is also a generative device that continues working once embodied: - The *diagram*is no longer an auditory or visual archive but a map, a cartography that is coextensive with the whole social field. It is an abstract machine. It is defined by its informal functions and matter and in terms of form makes no distinction between content and expression, a discursive formation and a non-discursive formation. It is a machine that is almost blind and mute, even though it makes others see and speak. * Deleuze, *Foucault*, 34. - The diagram makes abstracted function pass from one formation or system to the next. In this way, **it is a virtual map behind heterogeneous formation not only irreducible in its actual form, but also heterogeneous in its level of materiality**: like prison and the penal code, an architectural structure and a set of laws. - 두번째 다이아그램에 대한 정의 에서 푸코는 he focuses on the display of relations of pure function. - 건물의 요소가 아니라 그 환경 안의 사람 (간수와 죄수)의 관계를 통해서. 이 관계는 감옥의 스트럭처에 의해서 추상화 되고 다른 스트럭처로 이전될 수 있다. ➡︎ 학교, 병영 혹은 병원. - 하지만 ‘감시’는 다이아그라마틱 기능의 하나일 뿐이다. - 들뢰즈는 영지적 다이아그램 feudal diagram에 대해 적는다. * Gilles Deleuze, ‘Desire and Pleasure’, in *Two Regimes of Madness: Text and Interviews* *1975–1995*, ed. David Lapoujade, trans. Ames Hodges and Mike Taormina (New York: Semiotext(e), 2007), 125. - 나폴레옹적 다이아그람 * Deleuze, *Foucault*, 85. - 그리스의 다이아그람 * Deleuze, *Foucault*, 101. - 더 나아가 pastoral diagram. * Gilles Deleuze, ‘Michel Foucault’s Main Concepts’, in *Two Regimes of Madness:**Text and Interviews 1975–1995*, ed. David Lapoujade, trans. Ames Hodges and Mike Taormina (New York: Semiotext(e), 2007), 231. #### 6 - **들뢰즈가 말하는 다이아그램이란 무엇인가.** - the abstract function of the device. In the span of his answer, he begins with an architectural basis and ends by comparing the diagram to a map: - It is a ==display== of the relations between forces which constitute power in the above conditions: ‘The panoptic mechanism is not simply a hinge, a point of exchange between a mechanism of power and a function; it is a way of making power relations functions [*sic*] in a function, and of making a function through these power relations.’ - 파놉틱 메카니즘은 그저 중심점이 아니라, 메카니즘의 파워와 기능이 교환되는 포인트이다. 그것은 기능 안에 기능에 관계하는 파워를 만드는 방식이다. 그리고 파워 관계를 통해서 기능을 만든다. - We have seen that the relations between forces, or power relations, were microphysical, strategic multipunctual and diffuse, that they determined particular features and constituted pure functions. ==The diagram or abstract machine is the map of relations between forces, a map of destiny, or intensity, which proceeds by primary non-localizable relations and at every moment passes through every point, ‘or rather in every relation from on point to another’.== * Deleuze, *Foucault*, 36. - it is important to note the visual element in the explanation - 위에서 번역가는 display 란 단어로 expose를 번역했는데, 이는 exhibit. 전시하다 라는 의미는 다이아그램 기능의 visual 적 기능을 암시한다. - It means *through*, *apart*, *between*and hints at the multidimensional aspect of display. - Deleuze states this clearly: ‘A diagram is a map, or rather several superimposed maps. And from one diagram to the next, new maps are drawn.’ * Deleuze, *Foucault*, 44. - 이를 통해 두가지 다이아그램 방식을 생각해볼 수 있다. 건축과 지도제작법 cartography - Peter Eisenman 의 경우 다이아그램을 통해 크레이티브 프로세스로 활용한다. - 그에게 다이아그램과 스케치 혹은 플랜을 구분된다. - The diagram, as an analytical tool, ‘attempts to uncover the latent structure of organisation’. - * Peter Eisenman, *Written into the Void: Selected Writings 1990–2004*, intro. Jeffrey Kipnis (New Haven: Yale UP, 2007), 88. - A diagram connects between the theoretical and the real stages of the construction of a building. - ==Generically, a diagram is a graphic shorthand==. Though it is an ideogram, it is not necessarily an abstraction. It is a representation of something in that it is not the thing itself. In this sense, it cannot help but be embodied. It can never be free of value or meaning, even when it attempts to express relationships of formation and their processes. At the same time, a diagram is neither a structure nor an abstraction of structure. While it explains relationships in an architectural object, it is not isomorphic with it. * Eisenman, *Written into the Void*, 88. - First is the notion of embodiment. This part of the architectural diagram is an approximate sketch that reveals a building’s overarching yet implicit structure. - 건축적 다이아그램의 차이 - must be following the path of the actual plan of the building, and a conceptual diagram, which is devoid of value and meaning because it is pure abstract function. - reveals the [[becoming]] of forms and how they function – their processes. - 이것은 structure 가 아니라 - it traces the flow of focus that are part of a rigid organisation of a particular building. #reread 이 중간 페이지 다시 읽기 ### Assemblage #### 25 - The assemblage is connective, heterogeneous and multi- ple. It brings together disparate elements and organizes them. - Deleuze illustrates this with a description of a particular assemblage: the feudal assemblage: ‘The feudal machine combines new relationships with the earth, war, the animal, but also with culture and games (tournaments), with woman (courtly love): all sorts of fluxes enter into conjunction.’ - ==* Gilles Deleuze and Claire Parnet, *Dialogues*, trans. Hugh Tomlinson and Barbara Habberjam (New York: Columbia UP, 1987), 70.== - ‘What is an assemblage?’ asks Deleuze. - ‘It is a multiplicity which is made up of many heterogeneous terms and which establishes liaisons, relations between them, across ages, sexes and reigns – different natures. ==Thus, the assemblage’s only unity is that of co-functioning: it is a symbiosis, a “sympathy”.’== - * Deleuze and Parnet, *Dialogues*, 69. #### 65 - An assemblage is a multiplicity made up of heterogeneous elements. - Diagram abstracts to the level of pure function of different systems and crates the possibility of a passage of the abstract traits between systems. ➡︎ assemblage is an integral part of the mechanism of the diagram. ➡︎ And, if we are to start thinking about connectivity and abstraction, the analogy is a good place to start. - 세개의 term은 모두 들뢰즈의 철학 뒤에 있는 method 들이다. - Assemblage: brings together multiplicities. - Constraint: abstracts and makes repetition of traits possible. - Allagmatic: creates a concrete link between heterogeneous terms. ### 100 영화 예시 - The duality of the wasp and orchid open a constellation of concepts, such as territory, geography and the block. The block, as the solidification of a duality, is not without movement, as the montage technique demonstrates in the fluidity of the cinematographic arrangement. According to Deleuze, one cinematographic example, in which this definition of the diagram is crystallized in a cartographic superimposition, can be found in Resnais’ *My American Uncle*: ‘*My American Uncle*will be a grand attempt at diagrammatic mental cartography, where maps are superimposed and transformed, in a single character and from one character to the next.’113 Resnais’ film is interesting from a diagrammatic perspective: the American uncle from the title is the unrepresentational image around which the narrative of each character revolves. The uncle is the figure of an abstract notion – for example, failure, as one character explains. The uncle went to America to seek riches but failed and ended up homeless on the streets of Chicago. It is around these blind spots that the lives of three characters revolve, mapping a terrain based around something that is not there. The film is an excellent example of a diagram because it is said to be something else: a map. - A diagram is needed because it is a pluralistic, multidimensional and flexible machine; it does not trace a single formation (*skhêmatismos*)115 from one state to the next; it instead traces an 116 ensemble of transformations (*metaskhêmatismos*). It thus enables multiple transformations to be traced while allowing for the transformation of a network of dependent relations. The diagram captures different places at different points in time across different planes. ### 109 칸트의 스키마와 들뢰즈의 다이아그램 - 다이아그램은 트레이싱과 맵핑의 이중으로 조직되어있다. - 트레이싱은 functions by constraint - 사진이나 엑스레이처럼 그것은 선택과 isolating으로 시작한다. 인위적인 착색과 제한적 procedures 로 제제작reproduce를 intend to 목적으로 사용된다. - 맵핑은 밝혀지지 않은 공간을 폭로한다. - Exposes undiscovered spaces, expands the terrain on which thought habitually dwells, and extends the boundaries so as to spill out into unexplored regions. - Deleuze and Guattari concede that tracing and mapping must be superimposed to form a process of simultaneous constraint and expansion. - *푸코* 책에서 들뢰즈의 의미는 informal dimension of the matter and function: the diagram is the abstract machine and not just part of the definition of ‘abstract machine’. ### 110 - Ben Van Berkel and Caroline Bos 은 건축가의 시선으로 들뢰즈의 다이아그램을 분석한다. 그리고 그들은 세가지 다른 다이아그램이 있는 것이 아니라 다른 음조 tonalities 혹은 무드의 다이아그램이 한 컨셉안에 존재한다고 주장한다. - Each instance is like a different shade of one colour - 이 세가지 예시는 푸코, 베이컨, 푸르스트와 연결되어있다. 1. 푸코: of the concept is its antiprogrammatic element. By discarding the programmatic nature of the diagram, Deleuze focuses on **function** instead of instances. 2. 베이컨: The second facet is that of being anticliché 1. ‘It involves the **insertion** 삽입 of an element that contains within dense information something that we can latch 걸쇠를 걸더 onto, that distracts us from spiralling 소용돌이 into [[cliché]], something that is “suggestive 시사 암시”. - ==* Van Berkel and Bos, ‘Diagrams’, 22.== 2. The anticliché diagram operates as something distorting the controlled programme. These diagrams are ‘infrastructural’, write Van Berkel and Bos, ‘they can always be read as maps of movements, irrespective 관련없는 of their origins.’ (22) 3. Since they include a liberating element of randomness, they are ‘not selected on the basis of specific representational information’. 4. The result of a quick hand gesture, the splash is another manifestation of the disturbance created by the photographs and snapshots Bacon consulted before applying the paint to the canvas. 3. The third facet of the diagram in the lineage is operational: 1. the concept functions like a black hole. 2. It carries some sort of **directionality**. 3. This third facet is associated with Proust and involves a junction between music, literature and psychology. --- ### p 14 - “The concept of the diagram is adopted from Peirce and Deleuze to think about what techniques of existence do pragmatically-speculatively. - According to both Peirce and Deleuze, what they do is abstract. - **Diagramming is the procedure of abstraction when it is not concerned with reducing the world to an aggregate of objects** but, quite the opposite, **when it is attending to their genesis.** - 다이아그람화는 세계를 대상들의 총합으로 환원하는 데 관여하지 않을 때 추상화의 절차인 것이 아니다. 정반대로 그 대상들의 발생에 주의를 기울이고 있을 때 아이아그람은 추상화의 절차이다. - To abstract in this fuller sense is a technique of extracting the relational-qualitative arc of one occasion of experience—its subjective form—and systematically depositing it in the world for the next occasion to find, and to potentially take up into its own formation. - 이런 더 완전한 의미에서 추상한다는 것은, 경험의 한 계기 — 그 주관적 형식 — 의 관계적-질적 포물선을 추출하는 기술, 그리고 그것을 다음 계기가 발견하여 그 자체의 형성에 잠세적으로 이어질 수 있도록 세계 속에 그것을 체계적으로 놓는 기술이다. - The subjective form of an experience is the dynamic form of how the potentials for change initially found in the bare-active midst come to play out in its occasion. In addition to the initial conditions of given potential, recharges of potentials en route must also be factored in. - 어떤 경험의 주관적 형식은, 단순한-능동적인 한가운데서 최초로 발견된 변화 퍼텐셜들이 그 계기 안에서 작동하는 역동적 형식이다. 주어진 퍼텐셜의 최초의 조건 외에, 도중에 이루어지는 퍼텐셜들의 재충전 또한 고려되어야 한다. - These are chance intrusions: resistances, obstacles, and enablements. The event of experience self-modulates under pressure from these infusions of activity. To follow itself through to its culmination, the occasion under way must sense their potential on the fly, and creatively take[…]” - 이것들은 우연한 침범들, 즉 저항, 장애, 사용 가능성이다. 경험의 사건은 활동의 이런 융합들에서 오는 압력 아래에서 자기 변조한다. 그 자신을 정점으로까지 가져가기 위해서 이미 시작된 계기는 그떄그떄 그것들의 퍼텐셜을 감지해야 하고, 그것의 생성에 더해진 자극으로서 그 지속적인 전개에 창조적으로 끌어들여야 한다. ### 15 - The diagram as technique of existence is a way of informing the next occasion of these potentials for self-formation: “The greatest point of art consists in the introduction of suitable abstractions” (Peirce 1997, 226). - 존재의 기술로서 다이아그람은 자기 형성을 위한 이 퍼텐셜들의 다음 꼐기를 알리는 한 방식이다. “예술의 가장 위대한 점은 적절한 추상들의 도입에 있다.” ### 132 Chapter 4 - In chapter 3, the drawing of a peculiar alteration which exerts a power of transposition that creatively extends a manner of seeing into a form-of- life, understood as a complex manner of being/being able/knowing/ wanting appearing eventfully together in virtual mutual inclusion, was termed a *diagram*(Deleuze 2004b, 81–90). - 3장에서, 보기의 방식을 생명의-형상으로 창조적으로 확장하는 전위의 힘을 행사하는 독특한 변화의 소묘는 잠재적 상호 포함 속에 사건적으로 나타나는 존재being/할 수 있음/being able/앎/원함의 복합체로 이해되었고, 다디아그람이라 칭해졌다. - The diagram was considered a technique of existence. Conversely, every technique of existence can be considered a diagram. - 다이아그람은 존재의 기술로 여겨진다. 반대로 모든 존재의 기술은 다이아그람으로 여겨질 수 있다. - Valéry treats Degas’s drawing as a diagram. Deleuze corroborates Valéry’s main point: “the suprasensible diagram is not to be confused with the audio-visual archive” (Deleuze 1988a, 84, translation modified). - 발레리는 드가의 소묘를 하나의 다이아그람으로서 다룬다. 들뢰즈는 발레리의 요지를 뒷받침한다. “초감각적 다이아그람은 청각-시각 기로물과 혼동되어서는 안 된다.” - It “doubles” the order of sensuous forms and their history with a “[[becoming]] of forces” (manners of being/being capable/knowing/wanting) (Deleuze 1988a, 85; translation modified). Semblance and diagram-as-tech- nique-of-existence go doubly, [[becoming]] together. - 그것은 감각적 형상들과 그들의 역사를 “힘들의 생성”(존재/할 수 있음/앎/원함)과 더불어 “이중화한다.” 가상과 존재의 -기술로서의 다이아그람은 합쳐져서 이중으로 간다 ## Annotation Extracted Annotations: 28/03/2021, 17:59:44 28/03/2021, 17:59:44 From the Greek diagramma , it means to mark out by lines, to draw – where dia is through, across, apart and graphein is to write. The diagram is defined as a geometrical figure used to illustrate the- orems. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=10 ) basically, delineating its inner workings. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=10 ) In a conceptual diagram, the lines marking out a space are abstract traits. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=10 ) The diagram does not resemble particular elements in an imitative way; rather, it displays abstract functions that make up a system. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=10 ) The concept of the diagram revamps hylemorphic theory – the push and pull between form and matter – as well as the relationship between con- tent and expression, the connection between thought and image, and the difference between representation and non-representation. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=10 ) It also deals with organization, forces at work in social and cultural constructs; it is a way to travel from one system to another. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=11 ) The two heterogeneous systems, an environment and a statement, are related. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=12 ) Prison, the non-discursive formation, [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=12 ) penal law, the discursive formation [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=12 ) it is important to note the visual element in the explanation. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=15 ) I have shown how Deleuze defines this concept in two ways: first, as an informal dimension and second, as a display of relations as pure func- tions. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=32 ) , it needs to be embodied in some kind of image so that it can be grasped. That is why the concept of the diagram can be initially seen in architectural and cartographic terms. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=32 ) I illustrate the crucial element of diagrammatic opera- tions and suggest an emerging possibility of considering the diagram as a methodology. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=33 ) How does the diagram travel from one system to another? [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=33 ) The superfluous is taken out – walls, bodies, bars – and only the elements of surveillance are left – seeing without being seen, spatial arrangements benefiting the person in a position of authority, the prisoner's feeling of paranoia. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=33 ) nimbleness [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=33 ) In the third section, I first look at Gilbert Simondon's concept of analogy to consider how the idea of function changing form can be expanded into a systematic philosophy. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=34 ) The assemblage is connective, heterogeneous and multi- ple. It brings together disparate elements and organizes them. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=35 ) `What is an assemblage?' asks Deleuze. `It is a multiplicity which is made up of many heterogeneous terms and which establishes liaisons, relations between them, across ages, sexes and reigns – different natures. Thus, the assemblage's only unity is that of co-function- ing: it is a symbiosis, a “sympathy”.' [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=35 ) First, it must be acknowledged that À la recherche du temps perdu has been compared to an encyclopedia. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=38 ) Secondly, it appears that Proust's work is a peculiar type of encyclope- dia. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=38 ) vegetational [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=38 ) Thirdly, we can say that the description of Proust's encyclopedic and heterogeneous novel is tied to its self-reflexive nature. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=39 ) edging the post-modern view that the Enlightenment, with its grand nar- ratives and historical teleology based on a view of ever-evolving progress, [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=42 ) She observes that the Siècle des Lumières , with its drive towards ordering and systematizing, hides a `subversive counter-discourse'; 34 its `discursive heterogeneity' makes systematic reason `a powerful critical tool'. I [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=42 ) Deleuze and Guattari explain how the first principle of the concept is the duality of connection and heterogeneity [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=44 ) Here, Deleuze and Guattari reaffirm the neces- sity of abstraction from specific function so that the diagram can perform its particular organizational operation. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=44 ) Allagmatic is an ontological study of the crux of the relation between structure and operation. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=52 ) Muriel Combes explains in her work focusing on Simondon's concept of 74 transduction how Simondon replaces the mould with a modulation . switch makes it possible to think about the process of form-taking as an interaction between forces and materials. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=55 ) plane of the form and matter problematic, or hylemorphism, from hylé (matter) and morphé (form). [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=58 ) individuation is key in Sauvagnargues's interpretation of Simondon: not only does it inaugurate the distinction between operation and structure, it also provides a material opening of difference. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=58 ) An assemblage is a multiplicity made up of heterogeneous elements. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=74 ) The assemblage is an inte- gral part of the mechanism of the diagram. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=74 ) . And, if we are to start thinking about connectivity and abstraction, the analogy is a good place to start. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=74 ) The allag- matic creates a concrete link between heterogeneous terms. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=74 ) to read things in nature as signs and nature itself as signifying something. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=76 ) Classical botanists step into the modern era of natural history by ceasing [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=76 ) cybernetic function, behaves like an autopoetic system – from the Greek poesis , to make, to produce, to construct, a self-producing system: `Here we find prophetically formulated the very principle of cybernetic ensembles; the plate, image of the machine, is indeed in its way a brain; we intro- duce substance into it and set up the “program”: the vignette (the syntagm) serves as a conclusion.' [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=79 ) For Barthes, interestingly enough, the encyclopedic diagram, in its [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=79 ) The diagram is a duality composed of tracing and mapping. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=118 ) Tracing functions by constraint: `It is instead like a photograph or X ray that begins by selecting or isolating, by artificial means such as colorations or other restrictive procedures, what it intends to reproduce.' [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=118 ) Deleuze and Guattari concede that tracing and mapping must be superimposed to form a process of simultaneous constraint and expansion. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=118 ) the diagram is the abstract machine and not just part of the definition of `abstract machine'. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=118 ) . Viewing it as more than just an apt object through which to explore the classic duality of plan and build- ing, contemporary architectural theorists are interested in the virtuality, potentiality and multiplicity they can squeeze out of this loaded concept. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=119 ) The anticliché dia- gram operates as something distorting the controlled programme. These diagrams are `infrastructural', write Van Berkel and Bos, `they can always be read as maps of movements, irrespective of their origins.' [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=120 ) The result of a quick hand gesture, the splash is another manifesta- tion of the disturbance created by the photographs and snapshots Bacon consulted before applying the paint to the canvas. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=120 ) The third facet of the diagram in the lineage is operational: [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=120 ) If, however, its functions could be embodied in art, we could get at a clearer representation of the concept [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=187 ) . It is the figure beyond the frame. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=190 ) It makes, according to words Deleuze used in a different context, `invis- ible forces visible'. 2 What is unintelligible is captured, trapped in the skins of representation, `trap' being part of the etymological chain linked to `descent'. Yet, despite its function of representing the intangible, incarna- tion has the advantage of tracing this aesthetic problem according to a downward trajectory. [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=191 ) Analogy [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=191 ) `Exposure: Pasolini and the Flesh', explores this downward direction as he explains how the materiality of incarnation, even though it has its source in the transcendental, slips away from it, loses it: `Incarnation is all about abandonment – abandonment to the flesh. Paul writes that in becoming flesh Christ abandoned the form of God; he emptied himself by taking on a limited materiality. This self- emptying is the exposure of the flesh.' [Link](zotero://open-pdf/library/items/PF4WGGXF?page=192) ### Related ```dataview LIST FROM [[<% tp.file.title %>]] and -"Plans" and -"resources" ```