Deleuze 32

Delezue 32 德勒茲 Treatise on nomadology 論遊牧學

Translated by Springhero 雄伯

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

 

The sea as a smooth space is a specific problem of the war machine. As Virilio shows, it is at sea that the problem of the fleet of being is posed, in other words, the task of occupying an open space with a vortical movement that can rise up at any point. In this respect, the recent studies on rhythm, on the origin of that notion, do not seem entirely convincing. For we are told that rhythm has nothing to do with the movement of waves but rather that it designates “ form” in general, and more specifically the form of a “ measured, cadenced” movement. However, rhythm is never the same as measure. And though the atomist Democritus is one of the authors who speak of rhythm in the sense of form, it should be borne in mind that he does so under very precise conditions of fluctuation and that the forms made by atoms are primarily large, non-metric aggregates, smooth spaces such as the air, the sea, or even the earth. There is indeed such a thing as measured, cadenced rhythm, relating to the coursing of a river between its banks or to the form of a striated space; but there is also a rhythm without measure, which relates to the upswell of a flow, in other words, to the manner in which a fluid occupies a smooth space.

 

海洋作為平滑的空間是戰爭機器的明確問題。如比瑞洛所言,存在艦隊的問題出現在海上,隨時都會冒出要以渦旋動作佔據開闊空間的難題。在這方面,最近對於韻律及韻律觀念的起源的研究似乎並不完全令人信服。因為我們被告知,韻律波浪的動作毫無關係。相反的,韻律表明一般的「形式」,更明確地說,表明一種「經過測量、節奏化」動作的形式。可是,韻律跟測量從來不相同。雖然原子論者德模克利圖斯是曾經用形式的意涵提到韻律的作者之一,我們應該記住的是,他確實是在搖擺不定的的情境下才如此提到,原子所形成的形式主要是一大堆非韻律的聚集,平滑的空間,例如空中、海洋、或甚至是陸地。確實是有經過測量,節奏化的韻律這樣的東西,跟堤岸中間的河道及狹形化的空間的形式有關,但是也有一種韻律是無法測量,跟水流的上湧有關,換言之,跟液體佔據平滑空間的方式有關。

 

  This opposition, or rather this tension-limit between the two kinds of science—nomad, war machine science and royal, State science—reappears at different moments, on different levels. The work of Anne Querrien enables us to identify two of these moments; one is the construction of Gothic cathedrals in the twelfth century, the other the construction of bridges in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Gothic architecture is indeed inseparable from a will to build churches longer and taller than the Romanesque churches. Even farther, even higher…But this difference is not simply quantitative; it marks a qualitative change: the static relation, form-matter, tends to fade into the background in favor of a dynamic relation, material-forces. It is the cutting of the stone that turns it into material capable of holding and coordinating forces of thrust, and of constructing ever higher and longer vaults. The vault is no longer a form but the line of continuous variation of the stones. It is as if Gothic conquered a smooth space, while Romanesque remained partially within a striated space ( in which the vault depends on the juxtaposition of parallel pillars). But stone cutting is inseparable from, on the one hand, a plane of projection at ground level, which functions as a plane limit, and, on the other hand, a series of successive approximations ( squaring), or placings-in-variation of voluminous stones. Of course, one appealed to the theorematic science of Euclid in order to find a foundation for the enterprise; mathematical figures and equations were thought to be the intelligible form capable of organizing surfaces and volumes. But according to the legend, Bernard de Clairvaux quickly abandoned the effort as too “ difficult,” appealing to the specificity of an operative, Archimedean geometry, a projective and descriptive geometry defined as a minor science, more a mathegraphy than matheology. His journeyman, the monk-mason Garin de Troyes, speaks of an operative logic of movement enabling the “ initiate” to draw, then hew the volumes “ in penetration in space,” to make it so that “ the cutting line propels the equation” One does not represent, one engenders and traverses. This science is characterized less by the absence of equations than by the very different role they play: instead of being form forms absolutely that organize matter, they are “ generated” as “ forces of thrust” by the material, in a qualitative calculus of optimum. This whole current of Archimedean geometry was taken to its highest expression, but was also brought to a temporary standstill, by the remarkable seventeenth-century mathematician Desargues. Like most of his kind, Desargues wrote little; he nevertheless exerted a great influence through his actions and left outlines, rough drafts, and projects, all centered on problem-events: “ Lamentatiions,” “ draft project for the cutting of stones,” “ draft project for grappling with the events of the encounters of a cone and plane,…Desargues, however, was condemned by the parlement of Paris, opposed by the king’s secretary; his practices of perspective were banned. Royal, or State, science only tolerates and appropriates stone cutting by means of templates ( the opposite of squaring), under conditions that restore the primacy of the fixed model of form, mathematical figures, and measurement. Royal science only tolerates and appropriates perspective if it is static, subjected to a central black hole divesting it of its heuristic and ambulatory capacities. But the adventure, or event, of Desargues is the same one that had already occurred among the Gothic “ journeymen” on a collective level. For not only did the Church, in its imperial form, feel the need to strictly control the movement of this nomad science ( it entrusted the Templars with the responsibility of determining its locations and objects, governing the work sites, and regulating construction), but the secular State, in its royal form, turned against the Templars themselves, banning the guilds for a number of reasons, at least one of which was the prohibition of this operative or minor geometry.

 

這個相對會在不同的時刻,不同的層次,重新出現,或者說這是在兩種科學之間的緊張極限,遊牧是戰爭機器而皇家是國家科學。安、奎陵的作品使我們能夠辨認這兩種動作;一種是十二世紀歌德式大教堂的建築,另一種是十八及十九世紀橋樑的建築。歌德建築物跟想要建造比羅馬時代的教堂更高,維持更久的意念息息相關。它甚至於想要更遠,更高。但是不同不僅是數量方面,它也標名品質的改變:形式跟物質的靜態關係,傾向於淡入背景,以贊同物質跟力量的動態關係。石頭的切割使它成為能夠抵擋及協調的衝撞力的物質,並建造更高,更久遠的拱頂。拱頂不再是一種形式,而是一種石頭綿延變化的線條。好像是歌德式教堂征服了光滑的空間,而羅馬式教堂部份保持在狹長的空間(它的拱頂依靠平行柱子的並列)。但是石頭的切割在一方面地面層的平面投射息息相關,因為它充當一種平面限制。而在另一方面,它又是一系列的連續接近(方陣)或大量石頭的不同擺設。當然,我們可以訴諸於歐幾米德的定理科學來替這種企圖找到理論基礎;數學數字跟平等式被認為是清楚的形式能夠用來組織表面及容積。但是依照傳說,克拉伯很快就放棄這種努力,因為訴諸於可運算的阿基米德幾何學的明確性是太艱辛了。這種投射及描述的幾何學被定義為次要科學,是數形學,而不是數論學。他的技工,僧侶兼水泥匠特洛耶提到一種動作的運算邏輯,使「模型」才能畫得出來,然後再將容積砍成「空間的穿透」來製作模型,這樣「切割的線條推動平等式」。我們並不代表,我們產生並且穿越。這個科學的特性不是平等式的欠缺,而是它們扮演不同的角色:它們決非是組織物質的好形式,相反的,它們被最大量的數值微積分的物質,當著「衝撞力」「產生」。阿基米德幾何學的整個潮流被發揮到淋漓盡致,但是也被十七世紀的傑出的數學家爹沙鼓暫時中止。像其同僚,爹沙鼓著作不多,但是透過他的行動,影響卻很大,並留下一些大綱,粗稿,及設計,都集中於問題的事件:「耶立米哀書」,「石頭切割的草圖設計」,「處理圓錐形及平面形相會事件的草圖設計」。可是爹沙鼓被巴黎的議會判刑,被國王的內臣反對,他的透視圖的做法被禁止。皇家或國王的科學只容許及使用模版方式(方陣的相反)切割石頭,條件是要恢復固定的形式模式的初胚,數學數字及測量。皇家科學只容許及使用透視法,條件是靜態的,中間有個黑洞,剝掉它啟發性的流動能力。但是爹沙鼓這種冒險或事件,跟歌德式教堂的工匠集團層次所發生的是,並沒有什麼兩樣。因為不僅是教堂,在帝王形式下,覺得有必要嚴格控制這種遊牧科學的行動(它委任聖堂騎士負責決定它的位置跟東西,統管它的工作地點,規範建築),而且世俗的國家,以皇家的形式,反對聖堂騎士本身,以許多理由禁止團體集會,至少有一項是禁止這種運作或次要的幾何學。

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: