The Rhizome and the Complex

I. Being within the rhizome—seeing as the rhizome—walking within fissures and canals, following the space into and out of connections. Deleuze-Guatarri call to these fissures and to a tendency to delimit such canals as system or structure.  The pathways of the rhizome resemble the complex when one is attuned to proximity and returns to the hierarchical tree, linking canals and fissures by resemblance and analogy—turning toward canals taken and those represented as similar, tracing a space of relevance and history.  But the rhizome connects each canal by strands on a plane while the hierarchical structure situates above, external, breaking the fluidity and movement of the rhizome—any resemblance is the convergence of the branches of the rhizome and the outlines of these convergences can never be reduced to a simple binary or genesis.

II. The use of the text, their dissolving its separating triple movement as representation-subjectivity-reality, is within the rhizometric activity of relational opening. The text, in its spreading and deterritorialization makes a movement of opening into a physical-spiritual space where which neither gains priority.  The text as mapping and connecting, illuminating strands of the underlying rhizome is also an opening activity.  But the danger in such an opening is still the external activity of the complex-tree-reduction; the text as rhizometric is then both connective and disruptive as it moves to make the world, earth.  Thinking within the rhizome without root and decentered—removed from temporality, transcendence, and logos—disconnected from a place or home, marking each moment of movement and recognizing the spaces between external systems and the beckoning root—all open and disrupt.

III. The opposition of dualism, while reconciling the map-trace difference still leaves me questioning the nature of the opening disruption—the reorientation of thinking as the rhizome.  Situated in a physical space, even while revealing the rhizome; the hierarchical complex still operates as a tangible physical opposition.  Is this reduction a feature of rhizometric connection or an innate movement of accommodation-appropriation-assimilation by forces of Power?  If there is this irruptive force of Power as a human feature, the General demarcating the space of the complex and systematizing by hierarchical-temporal-technological apparatus; then does the relational opening of the rhizome—the realizing of movement in and out of the rhizome—conceive a dualism of the rhizome-complex, the opened and the closed?