Notes on Becoming-Intense, Becoming-Animal, Becoming-Imperceptible
August 20, 2013 § Leave a comment
Why are we reading this text in relationship to affect, how does it relate to the overall project? As a compositional deviation from organization, we’re interested in the way in which “becoming” is affective and how affect is unmoored from any roots, meaning, or content. How does this plane, that Dolce & Gabbana speak of, present potential for movement for the commons but also for the State apparatus? Becoming-animal is a movement from major (the constant) to minor (the variable), deterritorializes in a way where the social subject does not occupy a realm of stability, identity, but folded into movement.
“The German preromantic Karl Philipp Moritz feels responsible not for the calves that dies but before the calves that die and give him the incredible feeling of an unknown Nature-affect? For the affect is not a personal feeling, nor is it characteristic; it is the effectuation of a power of the pack that throws the self into upheaval and makes it reel. Who has not known these animal sequences, which uproot one from humanity, if only for an instant, making one scrape at one’s bread like a rodent or giving one the yellow eyes of a feline?” (240)
Rhizomatic. There is a freedom in addressing how things relate compositionally, yet the “degree of power” in which it folds into can diminish the ability to act. But the social significance of power through affect is untenable – the text can be used, instrumentalized, beautified in which ever way we so choose. Once objectified it all dissolves.