Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia

Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia

by Gilles Deleuze, Félix Guattari, Felix Guattari (Contributor)

4.08 of 5 stars 4.08 · rating details · 2,117 ratings · 102 reviews

A major work in the development of critical theory in the late 20th century, ANTI-OEDIPUS is an essential text for feminists, literary theorists, social scientists, philosophers, and other interested in the problems of contemporary Western culture. "An important text in the rethinking of sexuality and sexual politics spurred by the feminist and gay liberation movements".--...more

Paperback, 432 pages

Published December 15th 1983 by Univ Of Minnesota Press (first published 1972)

more details... edit details

Get a copy:

More…

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Lists with This Book

Thus Spoke Zarathustra by Friedrich Nietzsche

Critique of Pure Reason by Immanuel Kant

Best Philosophy Book

81st out of 469 books — 434 voters

The Devil in the White City by Erik Larson

A Short History of Nearly Everything by Bill Bryson

Best Non-Fiction (non biography)

478th out of 2,083 books — 3,719 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 3,000)

filter | sort: default (?) | rating details

Nov 23, 2009 Vaughn rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: mus-art, left-marxian

One of my top few favorite books ever. Wacky prose that hides its dense, educated side with unabashededly mindfucking disregard for mores, academic humility, linearity. It's more or less a critique of the early Lacan's emphasis on the Oedipal complex and the way that emphasis typifies structural analysis in anthropology and psychology, which was trying to edge out philosophy in France at the time. Of course, since it's Deleuze, it also has a vitalist, anti-law, anti-transcendence agenda. Since i...more

like 5 likes · see review

Feb 22, 2009 Greg rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: philosophy-theory-and-other-their-i

I could possibly say that this book ruined my life. I have never grappled with a book for as long as this one, for months I read and re-read it. I decided that I had to incorporate it into a paper that ended up taking me over a year to actually write and then edit, and then edit some more and then write some more before I finally decided to mail the stupid thing out to the professor from a mailbox that happened to be in front of some buildings that some planes would crash into about an hour or s...more

like 24 likes · see review

Jun 09, 2007 Aaron rated it 1 of 5 stars

I think people FEEL like they should give this book five stars -- but, unlike machines, they are not honest with themselves and feel compelled to rate it higher than it deserves. 1968 drivel.

like 7 likes · see review

Dec 01, 2007 Graham rated it 3 of 5 stars

This is pop philosophy and not serious political thought. If Orwell read this he would have eaten it and then puked it out projectile vomit style. It is the postmodern writing that so terrifies Sokal. All of that being said, it is damned fun to read. Just don't take it too seriously. People who fall deeply into this stuff become pretentious hipster assholes. The introduction by Foucault is important if you want any chance in understanding this mess. It sure could use more footnotes.

like 1 like · see review

Sep 07, 2012 John Kemp rated it 3 of 5 stars Recommends it for: avoid

I struggled with this for a year, more or less. The language is often baffling but if you let it wash over you, certain threads start to cohere in an intelligible way. D/G's "schizo-analysis" has suffered as a result of the debunking of anti-psychiatry (Laing,et al.) and anyone seriously concerned with their programme will have to junk the outdated, laboured and wilfully impenetrable argot in which it is couched. This is vintage '68 stuff after all so excess and hyperbole are inevitable. A groun...more

like · see review

Aug 24, 2011 James rated it 5 of 5 stars

This book is one giant attack on the traditional liberal-democratic view of the individual as a responsible agent and citizen. It is also a profound materialist critique of old-school Marxism and Freudianism. Since I'm a big fan of both of these schools of thought, this was a tough pill to swallow, but swallow it I did, and to great effect.

One of the big themes that stuck with me from the first chapter on is the idea of paranoia becoming a very real influence in the way that we conceptualize our...more This book is one giant attack on the traditional liberal-democratic view of the individual as a responsible agent and citizen. It is also a profound materialist critique of old-school Marxism and Freudianism. Since I'm a big fan of both of these schools of thought, this was a tough pill to swallow, but swallow it I did, and to great effect.

One of the big themes that stuck with me from the first chapter on is the idea of paranoia becoming a very real influence in the way that we conceptualize our relation, as individuals, to society. These large theoretical systems, like Marxism and Freudianism, push an individual's understanding through certain pat circuits that then condition our awareness at the expense of realizing new micro and macro possibilities. It's a very Nietzschean idea that D/G then broaden out with some really fancy (perhaps too fancy) jargon, such as the ideas of the body without organs, desiring machines, the socius, etc. Unfortunately, these ideas, as important as they are, do not reveal themselves in a very clear, straightforward way and must be made sense of, by the reader, through stages of refinement as they go along scratching their head from one section to next. Nonetheless, it is an infectious train of thought that develops and ultimately results in a clear analysis.

D/G build a whole new system of mental identification that encourages people to pay close attention to the flux of experience and to always be suspicious of large-scale explanations of a Hegelian sort which attempt to sublate negativities into larger conceptions on the mistaken assumption that life somehow can then be better understood or improved by the narrowing of possibility. Not so, say D/G. Better to skip free of such Oedipalizing influences into the nomadic realm of possibility, the realm of the schizo experiencing partial objects as though in a vacuum, unattached, new, possible.

As Foucault in the preface states, this is indeed a profound work of ethics. It is also a necessary counterpoint to much of the theoretical clutter that has been amassing for the last two centuries in Europe and America. I simply see this as a reminder that life remains open, full of possibility. D/G just had to invent a number of concepts to remind us and to give us, in a visceral way, a new perspective from which to view our ideological situation.

The obvious question, though, is: how far do you take this perspective? Yes, we should remain open and sensitive to systems of oppression, etc. But how does one truly change society? Is it by becoming more nomadic in one's outlook or more organized and stubbornly attached to ideals? I'm not so convinced that the former is the way. It's alluring, especially in our nihilistic culture of self-aggrandizing consumerism, where people have need of constant ego-petting. We always feel that we need to have seen every movie, read every book, talked to all the right people, etc. But obviously we can't, though we feel we should. And as a consequence everyone remains separate, stagnant, and obsessed with their own persistent, endless need to be relevant...

Setting aside these larger issues, this remains a profound and powerful book which offers a road map out of and beyond convention into an intermediary realm of loops and cross-currents and endless possibility, which while intermediary is perhaps the staging ground for far deeper and transformative thought.
(less)

like 2 likes · see review

Oct 25, 2011 Shawn rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: lit-theory, philosophy

As finished as I'm going to be... I started this book two years ago over winter break during grad school. I got as far as the conclusion (p. 273). Now, I have read about twenty pages or so, and it is all I can handle. It is going back on my shelf. I can say that at one point I knew what was going on with this text, but now, picking it up two years later, with many other texts completed... I have either no clue, or no interest in understanding this work.

I will merely add to the numerous reviewers...more

like · see review

Nov 08, 2007 James R added it Recommends it for: lunatics of skeptical temperament

Controversial literary project that pigeonholed Deleuze for many scholars, a bizarre synthesis of an eclectic range of texts. There is a spontaneity of thought that many find inspiring, (particularly artists) while it tends to repel a reading grounded in analytic philosophy. The criticism of this style of discourse helps orient the text just as much as its interpretations do.

like 1 like · see review

Apr 06, 2008 Peter added it

When I was in England I joined an informal discussion group about this book. The group included my advisor and his wife. We read the first paragraph and his wife said, "That paragraph is sexist." My advisor swore at his wife, and then the discussion group was done.

like 4 likes · see review

Oct 18, 2007 Count Duckula rated it 5 of 5 stars

to me this was the philosophical equivalent of thinking you know what jazz is (smoky, midnight, bar) and then hearing bitches brew ... challenging but in yr face liberating. i especially admired the strategic use of dull old Kant to mess with heads.

like 1 like · see review

Feb 12, 2011 Jeff rated it 5 of 5 stars

The introduction by Foucault is certainly a healthy way to view this book. As a guide to leading a non-fascist life, this work condenses a great number of ideas, and attempts to dismantle/discourse on the hang-ups of would-be revolutionary groups.

I would describe the writing style as delirious. At times it is very lucid, hitting hard at ideas standing in the way of the non-fascist life and free thought. At others, the prose descends, or rather extends (explodes?) down lines of escape, off in a m...more The introduction by Foucault is certainly a healthy way to view this book. As a guide to leading a non-fascist life, this work condenses a great number of ideas, and attempts to dismantle/discourse on the hang-ups of would-be revolutionary groups.

I would describe the writing style as delirious. At times it is very lucid, hitting hard at ideas standing in the way of the non-fascist life and free thought. At others, the prose descends, or rather extends (explodes?) down lines of escape, off in a million directions. At these times I felt a bit lost, however it is difficult to know whether it is the cause of the writing style, or my own inexperience in the finer points of Freud, Lacan, and the state of 1970s psychoanalysis. It wasn't until about half-way through the book that the ideas about the body without organs, machines of desiring-production, deterritorialization, the despot, neurosis/psychosis, and schizophrenia began to fit together on the internal limits, boundaries and axioms of capitalism.

It seems that they are trying to say that schizophrenia is the limit that capitalism is always trying to approach, but can never attain. The nature of capitalism is to axiomatize, subjugate, repress, "decode" and "deterritorialize" processes that exist outside or contra to the system in order to exploit and co-opt. These are processes that revolutionary movements fight against, overtly and covertly. Seeds within the movement, itself, are also moving against the movement, flowing towards axiomatization and cooptation. In this ad-hoc manner, it seems that capitalism tends toward this schiz limit, since contra/revolutionary flows are generated in a dynamic, random fashion; many small revolutionary acts become codified, and applied to the molecular, regardless of coherent applicability. In this way schizophrenia is not necessarily revolutionary, and is even tolerated by capitalism until it can be subjugated and ascribed a use value.

Contrary to many critics, I think that these ideas are quite relevant to modern revolutionary struggle- to live more freely on both the collective/social and individual levels.(less)

like 3 likes · see review

May 19, 2007 ifjuly rated it 5 of 5 stars

in my top 5 theory books of all time, and one of my favorite books across genre/divides, period. the style makes me smile every time i read it, and the point is one of the most important to me as well.

like 1 like · see review

Mar 14, 2013 Paul Adkin rated it 5 of 5 stars

1) Oedipus: Power is maintained by our submission to the Oedipus myth; Oedipus myth as a psychological explanation of why the masses accept a system which does not favour their own interests.
2) In Western Civilisation desire is conceived of as a means of acquisition rather than a means of production. This slant is important in maintaining the surplus, capitalist economy and any revolution would have to alter the perception we have of desire.

From a glance at the other reviews on Goodreads this i...more

like · see review

Jan 05, 2011 Geoff marked it as to-read · review of another edition

Shelves: to-poke-at-with-a-stick

I've actually had a copy of this book for several months, but, honestly, it keeps tossing me out around page 7 or so. Like my mind shatters after about 7 pages of this. I can't tell whether or not it is bullshit. It seems like something is going on here that maybe I am not equipped to understand, almost like when I am trying to read a book in an antiquated form of French (because my modern French isn't even very good). This book is a little vortex, a little black hole that keeps pulling me back...more

like 2 likes · see review

Apr 06, 2012 Pearce Shea rated it 3 of 5 stars

As others have said, my 2001 self would have given this five stars. My 2012 self gives it three. Part of this is time: this seemed exciting and daring and iconoclastic when I first read it. By the time I'd re-read it as a sophomore in college, it seemed inevitable. Now it seems naive. Also suffers a bit with age - is Freud really taken all that seriously anymore? (he wasn't when I was in college, either, but at least you read him in college; you had to grapple with Freudianism, so insofar as he...more

like · see review

Nov 21, 2011 Ralowe Ampu rated it 5 of 5 stars

i'm coming away from this pretty sure... uh, well questioning, actually, that since desiring machines produce production, whether the form of desire can be altered. following what is given here i don't really know. what barely sustained my thin interest throughout reading this: sensing the stylistic ancestral traces of what would later proudly become the ad busters-sounding graffito on subsequent oscar grant "riots." it becomes increasingly difficult to deny that this was a book i read simply so...more

like · see review

Oct 07, 2008 KATEtheGREATESTBESTONE rated it 5 of 5 stars

yo capitalism. i have sunbeams coming out of my ass.

like 6 likes · see review

Aug 31, 2011 Jonfaith rated it 4 of 5 stars

My review from 1994 would be gushing , near febrile about the insights revealed this suicide vest of a book. My 2011 self appreciates the arsenal of metaphors and allusions established. It also recognizes the limits of application of this in ordinary life. That is the present project, no? I mean we are living in some guise, whether o not as bodies without organs; but we find ourselves trapped in associations both molar and molecular: all the while feeling for stones in our pockets as we're prohi...more

like 1 like · see review

Jan 06, 2012 Grig O' rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: kindle

In his foreword, M Foucault interprets Anti-Oedipus as a book of ethics. This isn't evident from the text itself, as the authors are (almost) never explicit about how one should live. Instead they invent and combine neologisms like desiring-production, body without organs and deterritorialization to build their philosophy, making for a confounding couple hundred pages before you get a handle on the terminology. And the translators into English don't help - I'm sure they tried their best, but som...more

like · see review

Jan 13, 2013 Nathan "N.R." Gaddis marked it as to-read

Shelves: philosophy

Some day I will read some Deleuze. Meanwhile, my first attempt at this volume two years ago has left the following passage haunting me, that phrase, "A schizophrenic out for a walk. . ."

. . .is a better model than a neurotic lying on the analyst's couch. A breath of fresh air, a relationship with the outside world. Lenz's stroll, for example, as reconstructed by Büchner. This walk outdoors is different from the moments when Lenz finds himself closeted with his pastor, who forces him to situate

...more

like · see review

Jul 23, 2010 Ryan rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Before A Thousand Plateaus, Deleuze and Guattari penned this sprawling critical analysis of modernity. Essentially a synthesis of Freudian psychology and Marxist theory, this is one of the weirdest and most interesting books I've ever read. The reader must be prepared to confront an idiosyncratic (and obfuscating, according to the critics) sort of jargon: "desiring machines" plug into one another to form "assemblages" that constitute the social order, or "socius inscribed upon the body without o...more Before A Thousand Plateaus, Deleuze and Guattari penned this sprawling critical analysis of modernity. Essentially a synthesis of Freudian psychology and Marxist theory, this is one of the weirdest and most interesting books I've ever read. The reader must be prepared to confront an idiosyncratic (and obfuscating, according to the critics) sort of jargon: "desiring machines" plug into one another to form "assemblages" that constitute the social order, or "socius inscribed upon the body without organs." It all makes a sort of sense if you roll with it, I promise.

I feel like I need to re-read earlier portions now to fully grasp what was intended there, in light of a subsequent understanding of the authors' peculiar conceptual framework. And for what its worth, yes, I do believe the authors had something of importance to say here, and this work is not entirely an illusion of profundity created by intentionally abstract language.

It is probably advisable to have some background in Lacan, semiotics, Freud (especially his Civilization and its Discontents), Spinoza (many of his metaphysical concepts are used here), and naturally Marx. Antonin Artuad and several curious personalities from outsider and dadaist art feature in the earlier portion of the book. Deleuze and Guattari seem to use poetry and art in the way that Freud used myth.

This is a Marxist analysis applied to psychology, and therefore materialist, focused on production and processes instead of essences. Regimes are drawn along the lines of the molecular versus the molar: the multiplicity and the singularity, and the interplay of dynamics between the orders of emergent properties (molecules to proteins to cells to brains to...) It's all a very contemporary sort of realism that draws much from modern physics - I am reminded of Hofstadter's notion of "reverse causality" when they examine the causal relationship between personal psychology and the social order. Deleuze and Guattari specifically use the examples of thermodynamics and molecular biology when describing the various "regimes" that lie within their materialism.

The work is also entirely a critique of Freudian analysis. The reality of the Oedipal complex is not denied: it still exists, but not as an inherent aspect of the civilized mind, as Freud would have it. Instead the authors see the significance of Oedipus as a process by which individuals are "Oedipalized". The Freudian analyst forces a specific and "despotic" interpretation on the psychological subject in order to "cure" them (i.e., reintroduce them into productive society.)

Deleuze and Guattari place the individual psychology on a continuum that ranges from unconscious desire on the one end to the specific forms of economic and social production on the other. Hence, social repression becomes psychic repression, as individual subjectivity is programmed by larger social institutions through the function of the family. The specific mechanics of this process are analyzed much later in the book, when the authors address the historical development of social formations from tribal to feudal organization.

It's a terrifying, baffling, and potentially insightful approach to psychology and sociology. Like Wilhelm Reich before, they see personal psychology and neuroses and psychoses as a result or reflection of society. I believe they claim that schizophrenia is specifically a disease made possible in the capitalist psychological formation- or at least, it's "capitalism's disease". The specifics of this argument are impossible to describe without the authors' peculiar concepts of "flows", "deterritorialization", "coding / decoding flows" etc. In the end, I guess it's a strictly materialist view of society that sidesteps all of the traditional, social categories of knowledge and instead describes society as flows of materials and intensities created by "machines" in the broad sense of social, human, psychological formations.

A further note: The rear copy writing on this edition is terrible and makes this work seem like some sort of celebration of madness while drastically misrepresenting its social-theoretical content. The introduction from Foucault, however, is essential.(less)

like · see review

Sep 28, 2012 Phil rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: my-library, philosophy, favorites

This is Deleuze at his most abstruse. I would consider this work to be for post-modernism to what Hegel's phenomenology is to metaphysics. Nevertheless, it is an incredible analysis!

One must first consider the linguistical backbone of all post-modern thought in order to at the very least entertain the initial precepts. What was most marveling to me was the books oscillation between both synthetic and analytic thought, which are virtually mutually exclusive in philosophical thought. Much like Hei...more

like · see review

Nov 17, 2010 Rashedb26 bhuyan added it

Its a milestone in thinking.
I like the ideas of 'desiring machines' 'body without organ'and 'desiring production'.I would like to categorize these ideas as 'practical/literalistic' rather than spiritual or philosophical.
I liked the line: 'the child is a metaphysical being'(p-52).This cannot be true! but must be true! Here comes the necessity of 'desiring machine' that makes two apparently opposite statements at a time: the child is a machine; also, the child is full of desire.

like · see review

Jun 06, 2012 Adrian Stevenson rated it 4 of 5 stars

Recommended to Adrian by: Nick Land

Shelves: philosophy, politics, psychoanalysis, psychology, religion

An odd one this for sure. I 'studied' this book with Nick Land when doing an MA in Continental Philosophy at the University of Warwick some years ago now. As a big Freud fan, it appealed on that front too, but not sure how much I really got it. Time for another crack maybe.

like · see review

Jan 07, 2009 Troy rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: theory

Anti-Oedipus by Deleuze and Guattari is one of the harder books I've ever read. It's theory and it's an attempt to think differently; an attempt to change our underlying and unfocused ideology; an attempt to rewrite psychoanalysis and an attempt to think through Capitalism. Hell of a book. Worth the trouble.

like · see review

Nov 18, 2008 Dan rated it 3 of 5 stars

I only understood this book in bits and pieces. While some of the concepts Deleuze and Guattari employ are familiar ideas from Sigmund Freud or Karl Marx, there are a number of concepts that are not clearly defined in the text, at least that I was able to see. The book is abstract and dense, sort of the postmodern equivalent of Hegel.

While the text is difficult, the argument Deleuze and Guattari make is fairly significant. My view of the psychoanalytic industry has changed as a result of reading...more

like · see review

Jul 27, 2012 Peter rated it 4 of 5 stars

Challenging but mostly rewarding. Helpful to have some background in Freud and Marx to get more out of the book. I read it in a book club outside of school and discussing it with others was important for making sense of a lot of the main ideas of the book.

like · see review

Jan 02, 2013 JW rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: cultural-criticism, philosophy, postmodernism, psych

This book was a STRUGGLE, but one my intellectual wanderings could no longer set aside. It's harrowing density was worth it in the end; really adds some necessary context to anyone building a knowledge of the 'postmodern.'

like · see review

Jan 02, 2009 Leonard Pierce rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: philosophy

By far the best book from the Deleuze/Guattari team, this is a fascinating study of the contradictions of late-period capitalism put through a Freudian/mythological lens that makes it surprisingly graspable.

like · see review

Apr 30, 2011 Natasha rated it 2 of 5 stars

Shelves: philosophy, classics

What??? This is a very rambling book. I sometimes got what the authors were talking about, but more times than not, I had no idea what was going on. The book was interesting at times. In general, just a really whacky book.

like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … 99 100 next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »

Recommend it | Stats | Recent status updates

combine
Other Editions (19)

More editions...

Genres

Philosophy

184 users

Philosophy > Theory

40 users

Non Fiction

26 users

Psychology

21 users

Politics

9 users

Academic

8 users

Cultural > France

8 users

History

6 users

Sociology

6 users

Economics

6 users

See top shelves...

Readers also enjoyed similar books

About Gilles Deleuze

Deleuze is a key figure in postmodern French philosophy. Considering himself an empiricist and a vitalist, his body of work, which rests upon concepts such as multiplicity, constructivism, difference and desire, stands at a substantial remove from the main traditions of 20th century Continental thought. His thought locates him as an influential figure in present-day considerations of society, crea...more Deleuze is a key figure in postmodern French philosophy. Considering himself an empiricist and a vitalist, his body of work, which rests upon concepts such as multiplicity, constructivism, difference and desire, stands at a substantial remove from the main traditions of 20th century Continental thought. His thought locates him as an influential figure in present-day considerations of society, creativity and subjectivity. Notably, within his metaphysics he favored a Spinozian concept of a plane of immanence with everything a mode of one substance, and thus on the same level of existence. He argued, then, that there is no good and evil, but rather only relationships which are beneficial or harmful to the particular individuals. This ethics influences his approach to society and politics, especially as he was so politically active in struggles for rights and freedoms. Later in his career he wrote some of the more infamous texts of the period, in particular, Anti-Oedipus and A Thousand Plateaus. These texts are collaborative works with the radical psychoanalyst Félix Guattari, and they exhibit Deleuze’s social and political commitment.

Gilles Deleuze began his career with a number of idiosyncratic yet rigorous historical studies of figures outside of the Continental tradition in vogue at the time. His first book, Empirisism and Subjectivity, isa study of Hume, interpreted by Deleuze to be a radical subjectivist. Deleuze became known for writing about other philosophers with new insights and different readings, interested as he was in liberating philosophical history from the hegemony of one perspective. He wrote on Spinoza, Nietzche, Kant, Leibniz and others, including literary authors and works, cinema, and art. Deleuze claimed that he did not write “about” art, literature, or cinema, but, rather, undertook philosophical “encounters” that led him to new concepts. As a constructivist, he was adamant that philosophers are creators, and that each reading of philosophy, or each philosophical encounter, ought to inspire new concepts. Additionally, according to Deleuze and his concepts of difference, there is no identity, and in repetition, nothing is ever the same. Rather, there is only difference: copies are something new, everything is constantly changing, and reality is a becoming, not a being.
(less)

More about Gilles Deleuze...

Books by Gilles Deleuze

Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia

Nietzsche and Philosophy (European Perspectives)

Masochism: Coldness and Cruelty & Venus in Furs

More…

Share This Book

Facebook Twitter Your website

Trivia About Anti-Oedipus: Cap...

No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »

Quotes from Anti-Oedipus: Capitali...

“Shit on your whole mortifying, imaginary, and symbolic theater!” — 26 people liked it

“It is not the slumber of reason that engenders monsters, but vigilant and insomniac rationality” — 25 people liked it

More quotes…

title link	preview: Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia
avg rating	preview: Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia Goodreads rating: 4.08 (2117 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/118317.Anti_Oedipus?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1347698453l/118317.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/118317.Anti_Oedipus?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia by Gilles Deleuze[/url]

Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia

Friend Reviews

Community Reviews

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website