Gilles Deleuze's Difference and Repetition : A Critical Introduction and Guide

Rating:
Summary: Probably as good as it's going to get
Review: For everyone frustrated and defeated by Deleuze's masterwork, you now have before you a way to tame the beast in the form of this strange little book. Williams is pretty good on most points, and he does his darnedest to clarify D&R without caricaturing it. I think he succeeds, and this despite the fact that I would never read, or recommend that someone read, Deleuze's work as he has done. By which I mean: more or less in constant dialogue with the so-called analytic tradition. Williams not only develops Deleuze's ideas along those lines, but builds a more or less perpetual opposition to Deleuze by posing the most likely objections from the analytic camp. In the end, Deleuze wins--as well he should in a book on a book containing all the reasons why Deleuze thought he won--but, I just kept feeling the question pressing...at what cost? Might it not be more encumbent upon us left the task of making good on Deleuze's legacy to resist fusing that legacy and judging it in tandem with a tradition that he always sought to distance himself from? I think so, but as I am not master of all things, I'll go ahead and recommend this book on the strength of what it does quite capably: give a clear and sustained account of the principles underlying D&R; approach the work in a critical spirit that never reverts into blind attack or adulation; and, most importantly for me, keeps it concise, not getting lost in the infinite texture and detail of the work, and sticking to the "big" points. After all, this is an introduction to a great work of philosophy and not a key to scripture, and Williams does us all a great service by leaving most of the work up to us---he just ensures that we can begin to read the thing!!!
Pretty dang good.

Rating:
Summary: Probably as good as it's going to get
Review: For everyone frustrated and defeated by Deleuze's masterwork, you now have before you a way to tame the beast in the form of this strange little book. Williams is pretty good on most points, and he does his darnedest to clarify D&R without caricaturing it. I think he succeeds, and this despite the fact that I would never read, or recommend that someone read, Deleuze's work as he has done. By which I mean: more or less in constant dialogue with the so-called analytic tradition. Williams not only develops Deleuze's ideas along those lines, but builds a more or less perpetual opposition to Deleuze by posing the most likely objections from the analytic camp. In the end, Deleuze wins--as well he should in a book on a book containing all the reasons why Deleuze thought he won--but, I just kept feeling the question pressing...at what cost? Might it not be more encumbent upon us left the task of making good on Deleuze's legacy to resist fusing that legacy and judging it in tandem with a tradition that he always sought to distance himself from? I think so, but as I am not master of all things, I'll go ahead and recommend this book on the strength of what it does quite capably: give a clear and sustained account of the principles underlying D&R; approach the work in a critical spirit that never reverts into blind attack or adulation; and, most importantly for me, keeps it concise, not getting lost in the infinite texture and detail of the work, and sticking to the "big" points. After all, this is an introduction to a great work of philosophy and not a key to scripture, and Williams does us all a great service by leaving most of the work up to us---he just ensures that we can begin to read the thing!!!
Pretty dang good.