Reading Deleuze & Guattari is always like framing, reframing, deterritorializing, and blurring the boundaries of chaos, much like the work that art and philosophy do to the thinking, sensating, affecting body that Grosz elucidates here. I sometimes think of A Thousand Plateaus as a dematerialized artwork itself. Grosz’s writing is incredibly creative and evocative towards the mapping of new connections, overlays, and “lines of flight” between art and philosophy, as well as in thinking about the very ontology of both fields. In terms of this particular writing in relation to my own artistic practice, as I was reading I had a few questions that were not quite addressed, which are perhaps more philosophical than artistic, but can be connected nonetheless. These questions deal primarily with the congruencies or incongruencies between Grosz’s ”framing of Deleuze’s framing” of art in the ontological sense, and Peircian phenomenology and semiotics. Grosz writes, “Deleuze suggests, in opposition to those philosophical or phenomenological approaches to the arts that analyze their intentionality or the mutual engagements of subjects and objects in artworks, that the arts produce and generate intensity, that which directly impacts the nervous system and intensifies sensation. Art is the art of affect more than representation, a system of dynamized and impacting forces rather than a system of unique images that function under the regime of signs” (3). Would a Peircian understanding of phenomenology be disjunctive or counter toward this proposal? Deleuze drew much upon Peirce, particularly in Cinema 1 & Cinema 2, so I’m wondering why or if these writings were precluded in Grosz’s book (which perhaps I will find out once I get a full copy of it). Also, the footnote (#14) on page 18 states that “Deleuze himself seems rather contemptuous of postmodernist art, and especially conceptual art. One of the challenges facing Deleuzianism is how to direct a Deleuzian-inspired analysis to texts and movements for which he himself had little time.” Deleuze and Guattari have certainly found a home in contemporary new media theory practices and discourses, which is not to assume a sameness between postmodern/conceptual and new media art, but one should certainly acknowledge a lineage. And again, what of Deleuze’s writings on cinema is this introduced or applied in this particular text by Grosz? I find the discussion around what we mean when we talk about art a bit limiting if we are to only think of painting or music what of other forms where would the Situationists fit in? And what about socially engaged situational art, happenings and other performative acts, Internet-based art, etc?