Deleuzeelaboratesontheconceptofvisionsandauditions,suggestingfinallythatliterature’svocationisalwaystopushlanguagetoitsoutside,andintheprocesstoopenwordstotheworld.

ForDeleuzeandGuattari,languageisaformofaction,andlinguisticregularitiesaremerelypartialcomponentsofpowerstructuresthatenforceregularpatternsofpractice.Whenwriterssubvertphonetic,sy

Sade’suniverseisoneofrationaldelirium,ironicdemonstrationandreiteratedmechanicalmovement,whereasMasoch’sisoneofimaginaryphantasy,humorouseducationandfrozensuspension.

Thelineofflightultimatelyisthetrajectoryofaprocessofbecoming-other,thecourseofalinethatalways“passesbetween.”Thelineofflightisbothinsideandoutsidelanguage,anditspresenceisman

萨德和马索克通常被视为他们名字所代表的性倒错（perversions）的典型病例，但德勒兹认为他们都是权力与欲望的社会结构的伟大症状学家。这两位作家创造了各自的复本（double）世界，这个复本世界作为某种文化批评形式发挥作用并打开生命的新可能性。但德勒兹认为，二者所构想的世界彼此不可通约，并且，我们不能错误地将其理解为施虐受虐恋（sadomasochism）综合征。萨德的世界充满着理性的谵妄（delirium）、反

SadeandMasochareoftenviewedasspecimensoftheperversionsassociatedwiththeirnamesbutDeleuzearguesthateachisagreatsymptomatologistofsocialstructuresofpoweranddesire.Eachfashionsado

ThisnarrativeoftheLawisnomerefictionforDeleuzeandGuattari,fortheyarguethatinTheTrialKafkadisclosesthe“diabolicalpowersofthefuture”—thoseofNazism,Stalinismandbureaucraticcapitali

与萨德和马索克的情形如出一辙，卡罗尔和阿尔托也通常被视为心理疾病的样本，某些情况下还被视为同一种疾病——精神分裂症（schizophrenia）。通过分析阿尔托对诗歌《伽卜沃奇》（“Jabber-wocky”）的意译，德勒兹指出，卡罗尔和阿尔托处于截然不同的世界中，并且二者都是具备罕见洞识的症状学家和拓扑学家。卡罗尔倒错的无意义话语（nonsense）展露出一个表面（surfaces）和事件（events）的世界，这

Deleuze and Guattari argue that Kafka’s concept is less one of a literature written by a linguistic or cultural minority per se, than one of a literature issuing from a minor usage of language, that is, from a

最后说明一个方法论问题：任何人在撰写关于德勒兹的论著时都面临着一个无法解决的特殊困难。德勒兹最重要的四部著作是以哲学史上独一无二的合作方式与费利克斯·瓜塔里（劭Guattari）共同撰写的。瓜塔里本身就是一位重要的理论家，而且其诸多著作值得仔细研读和讨论。毫无疑问，他在内容上和形式上都对合著贡献良多。与德勒兹或瓜塔里各自的创作不同，德勒兹-瓜塔里的合著显然充满着幽默、能量和胆识。但是我们不能在这些合著中把德勒兹和瓜塔

DeleuzereferstoProust’sAlarecherchedutempsperduas“ageneralsemiology,asymptomatologyofworlds”

Thosetendenciesarevirtualratherthanactual,buttheyarenonethelessreal,forwhichreasonTheTrialisnotsimplyarepresentationofthesocialmachineoftheLawbutitselfanexperimentationonthere

Kafkaisaculturalphysician,inthathediagnosesthediabolicalpowersofthefutureandprescribeslinesofflightfromthosepowers.

文学创造生命的新可能性，在其最后一部著作《批评与临床》（1993）中，德制熊提出了作家实现这一目标的各种途径。第六章将集中讨论两种方式：生产“逃逸线”（linesofflight）和创造“视觉（visions）和听觉（auditions））”。德勒兹经常用“线”这一术语来从整体上讨论写作和生命，并且，正是在这一大语境中，其“逃逸线”概念的丰富意义才鲜明可见。逃逸线归根结底是生成-他者（becoming-other

Buttheworldseachconstructsareincommensurable,Deleuzeclaims,andnottobeunderstoodintermsofthefalsesyndromeofsadomasochism.

第四章将讨论“次要文学”这一主题。德勒兹和瓜塔里从卡夫卡日记中提取出这一概念，卡夫卡在日记中概述了本土的布拉格捷克人的“次要文学”的特点。但是，德勒兹和瓜塔里认为，卡夫卡的次要文学概念并非指语言上或文化上的小族裔自身的某种文学写作，而母宁说是从语言的某种次要使用（mimor usage）中产生出的文学，这种次要使用意味着掌控语言的变量，使其失衡对于德韵然和瓜塔里来说，语言是一种行动，语言的规则性只是增强规则实践模式

Yet the truth of artistic signs, Deleuze shows, is not that of an objective reality nor one of subjective associations, but the truth of a self-differentiating difference that unfolds itself and thereby creates

The writer for Deleuze is a Nietzschean physician of culture, both a symptomatologist who reads culture’s signs of sickness and health, and a therapist whose remedies promote new possibilities for life.

The cultural physician is not simply an interpreter of signs, but also an artist who joyfully eradicates cultural pathogens and invents new values that promote and enhance life.

Yet despite the ubiquity of literary concerns and citations in his works, nowhere does Deleuze directly offer a systematic “theory” of literature, nor is one easily extrapolated from his various literary studie