The essays included in this volume were first presented in the 2004 Trent University international conference, ‘Gilles Deleuze: Experimenting with Intensities.’ The collection wants to address some of the outstanding issues in Deleuzian scholarship and to be one more tribute to the ‘stutterer,’ whose rasping voice and rhizomatic writings do not, despite the passage of time, show signs of loosening their hold on our philosophical imagination. I am sure that I express the sentiments of everyone who has contributed to this volume as I acknowledge here our shared intellectual debt: ‘Deleuze a ite notre maitre.’ While some of us will remember that these are the words Deleuze used once to express his own debt to Sartre, I feel even more comfortable in appropriating them as I begin to see how much the relationship that my colleagues and I have maintained with Deleuze resembles the one he had maintained with Sartre: our intellectual debt to him does not make us his disciples, any more than his debt made him a Sartrean. Never was it more pertinent than it is today to reiterate this thought. There are no Deleuzians; there are only people using Deleuze-blocs and Deleuze diagonal lines of transformation for the sake of creating concepts in philosophy, sensations in the arts, and modes of living in ethics and politics that are not necessarily (and sometimes not at all) Deleuze’s.
Gilles Deleuze taught us that philosophy is the creation of concepts aiming, in a precarious manner, to impose, consistency upon a chaos that he himself preferred to see as the seething apeiron of Empedocles-rather than as a void and a naught. He placed plenty of demands on the creating philosopher: he asked her to face her canvas, and, like an artist, to begin by wiping away the cliches and the ready-mades of the doxa that stand in the way of her creation; to suspend the chattiness that the dominant ideology of communication encourages, and to opt for the desert of thinking and writing-a desert always populated by packs and tribes. The result of this condition, he promised, is not a dreaded aphasia, but rather the creative glossolalia of indirect discourse. As for the veracity of this glossolalia, Deleuze dares us to find it in the interesting and remarkable concepts that would punctuate and sustain it-in other words, in their ability to offer solutions to their parent problems or-perhaps the same thing-in their ability to make existing problems resonate together. Est enim verum index sui. Salut done a un maitre Spinoziste.