With the expression semiochemistry, it is possible to synthesize the
sense of the entire discourse on the double articulation of language
developed in A Thousand Plateaus. In language we can distinguish a
plane of the sign and a plane of the event. The words, the sound, the
grapheme, the image, are all signs and they all open up signifying
chains. But events are also material things, objects that function
according to particular laws and produce specific effects.
This field was sown by Russian formalism at the start of the century,
and the artistic avant-garde reaped its fruits throughout the twentieth
century. If we take note of this double articulation in language, we can
distinguish a semantic level – a level on which signs produce signifying
effects – and a semiochemical level on which signs function affectively,
opening emotional, relational, imaginary chains. Signs themselves
behave as if they were events, and events behave as if they were signs.
In an essay in the volume, Il secolo deleuziano[The Deleuzian Century],
entitled ‘How Deleuze Makes Signs’, Paolo Fabbri says that:Any sign is the effect of the action of a body on another body, and
therefore affect: and this variation of effects on a body provokes a
variation in power [potenza], in affective sensibility: increase of
power (joy), decrease of power (sadness) ... Always relying on
Spinoza, Deleuze asks the question of the traditional distinction
between conventional sign and natural sign, that is, the problem of
the arbitrary aspect in language. And Deleuze’s answer is obvious:
no, language is not arbitrary given the obvious consideration that
linguistic signs always are connected with other signs that are
natural signs ... Any sign is a translation of other signs, and above
all, signs always refer to signs. In short, there is no external reality to
signs since signs are constitutive of objects and nominatives of
events, and thus are themselves their own reality. (113–14, empha-
sis in the original, translation corrected to conform to original)In the interview ‘On Philosophy’ (Negotiations, 135–55), Deleuze said
that the sign can be seen as an incorporeal carrier of meanings. But it
can also be considered as a corporeal agent, like a virus, to use a meta-
phor that William Burroughs used for the first time (see, for example,
Burroughs, ‘Ah Pook Is Here’).^2 There is an acoustic materiality, a graphic
materiality, and even a performative materiality of words. Letting out a
cry in a crowd is like handling a material substance, it’s like handling
explosives. And contamination between art and advertising in the media
era has shown how signs can unleash gigantic economic processes.94 Thought, Friendship and Visionary Cartography9780230_221192_10_cha09.pdf 10/3/08 11:35 AM Page 94