 |
 |
Surface without depth??? I'm not sure that can be true if the crystal has two sides. Surely ( despite the usual stuff about proliferation of simulacra) Deleuze does not (like, say, baudrillard) emphasise the replacing of real with virtual image (what i assume is surface without depth) but rather the oscillation of real and virtual around a poiint of indiscernibility. This would suggest a depth ... somewhat akin to the multi-facetted rhizome ... perhaps ...... Anyway, what I'm suggesting is .... its not that you can't have metaphor (something meaning something else) so much as never knowing what is real and what virtual , what stands for what, due to the nature of becoming other. Yes, admittedly the use of crystal and other such images seems to strike a paradox though. Its a teaser! d. %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%