Editing Erewhon (section)

===Deleuze and Guattari===
The French philosopher [[Gilles Deleuze]] used ideas from Butler's book at various points in the development of his philosophy of difference. In ''[[Difference and Repetition]]'' (1968), Deleuze refers to what he calls "Ideas" as "Erewhon". "Ideas are not concepts", he said, they are "a form of eternally positive differential [[Multiplicity (philosophy)|multiplicity]], distinguished from the identity of concepts."<ref>Deleuze (1968, p. 288).</ref> "Erewhon" refers to the "nomadic distributions" that pertain to [[Simulacrum|simulacra]], which "are not [[Universal (metaphysics)|universals]] like the [[Category (Kant)|categories]], nor are they the ''hic et nunc'' or ''nowhere'', the diversity to which categories apply in representation."<ref>Deleuze (1968, p. 285).</ref> "Erewhon", in this reading, is "not only a disguised ''no-where'' but a rearranged ''now-here''."<ref>Deleuze (1968, p. 333, n.7).</ref>

In his collaboration with [[Félix Guattari]], ''[[Anti-Oedipus]]'' (1972), Deleuze draws on Butler's "The Book of the Machines" to "go beyond" the "usual polemic between [[vitalism]] and [[Mechanism (philosophy)|mechanism]]" as it relates to their concept of "[[Desiring-production|desiring-machines]]":<ref>Deleuze and Guattari (1972, pp. 312–314).</ref>
{{blockquote|For one thing, Butler is not content to say that machines extend the [[organism]], but asserts that they are really limbs and organs lying on the [[body without organs]] of a society, which men will appropriate according to their power and their wealth, and whose poverty deprives them as if they were mutilated organisms. For another, he is not content to say that organisms are machines, but asserts that they contain such an abundance of parts that they must be compared to very different parts of distinct machines, each relating to the others, engendered in combination with the others ... He shatters the vitalist argument by calling in question the specific or personal unity of the organism, and the mechanist argument even more decisively, by calling in question the structural unity of the machine.|[[Gilles Deleuze|Deleuze]] and [[Félix Guattari|Guattari]]|''[[Anti-Œdipus]]''}}