In fact, subjectivity is plural – polyphonic, to borrow a term preferred by Mikhail Bakhtin. It is not constituted by a dominant, determining factor that directs other factors according to a univocal causality.

-Pierre-Felix Guattari The Guattari Reader edited by Gary Genesko pg 193

We do not stand before a subjectivity already given, fitted and packed; rather, we are called to produce it. Confronted with the conditions we meet constantly in daily life something must be done, and the key to this action is the question of assuming extremes. This is just the opposite of turning toward a being already there, already formed, because being is above all becoming, event, production.

All dominant subjectivity is constructed to prevent this alternative which I refer to as chaosmic, in the interplay between complexity and chaos.

-Pierre-Felix Guattari The Guattari Reader edited by Gary Genesko pg 215

The Text is plural. Which is not simply to say that it has several meanings, but that it accomplishes the very plural of meaning: an irreducible (and not merely an acceptable) plural. The Text is not a co-existence of meanings but a passage, an overcrossing; thus it answers not to an interpretation, even a liberal one, but to an explosion, a dissemination. The plural of the text depends, that is, not on the ambiguity of its contents but on what might be called the stereographic plurality of its weave of signifiers (etymologically, the text is a tissue, a woven fabric). The reader of the Text may be compared to someone at a loose end (someone slackened off from any imaginary); this passably empty subject strolls- it is what happened to the author of these lines, then it was that he had a vivid idea of the Text- on the side of a valley, a oued flowing down below (oued is there to bear witness to a certain feeling of unfamiliarity); what he perceives is multiple, irreducible, coming from a disconnected, heterogeneous variety of substances and perspectives: lights, colours, vegetation, heat, air, slender explosions of noises, scant cries of birds, children’s voices from over on the other side, passages, gestures,, clothes of inhabitants near or far away. All these incidents are half-identifiable: they come from codes which are known but their combination is unique, founds the stroll in a difference repeatable only as difference (which does not mean its individuality) its reading is semelfactive (this rendering illusory any inductive-deductive science of Texts- no “grammar”of the text) and nevertheless woven entirely with citations, references, echoes, cultural languages (what language is not?), antecedent or contemporary, which cut across it through and through in a vast stereophony.

-Roland Barthes Image Music Text pgs 159-160 translated by Stephen Heath

My reading remains suspended between the image and its description, between definition and approximation.

-Roland Barthes Image Music Text pg 61 translated by Stephen Heath