Deleuze's work requires intimate familiarity with a great

>>1780600
>The history of philosophy has always been the agent of power in philosophy, and even in thought. It has played the repressors role: how can you think without having read Plato, Descartes, Kant and Heidegger, and so-and-so's book about them? A formidable school of intimidation which manufactures specialists in thought - but which also makes those who stay outside conform all the more to this specialism which they despise. An image of thought called philosophy has been formed historically and it effectively stops people from thinking.

>>1780627
So I'm gathering that while the prerequisites may be oppressive, they're still necessary if you want to understand modern/contemporary philosophy

While I'm asking, I'd also like to know what you think what I should read as a prerequisite to Deleuze? I realize that might be a long list.

>>1780722

This course has a list of suggested readings before tackling Deleuze: http://www.protevi.com/john/DG/index.html

I also recommend Dosse's biography of Deleuze & Guattari: https://www.amazon.com/Gilles-Deleuze-F%C3%A9lix-Guattari-Intersecting/dp/0231145616

Some of his work is easy to read. A thousand plateous is one example.
I read it and his first book on cinema which is actually much harder ot read. Sometimes I had to look some concepts up and i did so.
Dont be a pussy.

Deleuze's (and Guattari's) work is charlatanism by people who couldn't accept that their beloved communism had failed.

>>1783763
>Deleuze and Guattari
>communist
lmao they are beyond that babby shit

>>1780600
I say suffer through the reading and you might find an enlightening viewpoint on the other end.

>>1784662
But it's not really reading if I don't understand any of the words being used.

>>1784920
Well I understood your post in the OP, couldn't be too hard to decipher.

>>1782838
>advertising your or your professor's course
>on 4chan

>>1784662
this, you'll at least understand contemporary art