«We aren’t even trying to interpret, to say that this means that. 5
And we are looking least of all for a structure with formal oppositions and a fully constructed Signifier; one can always come up with binary oppositions like “bent head-straightened head” or “portrait-sonority” and bi-univocal relations like “bent head-portrait” or “straightened head-sonority.”
But that’s stupid as long as one doesn’t see where the system is coming from and going to, how it becomes, and what element is going to play the role of heterogeneity, a saturating body that makes the whole assembly flow away and that breaks the symbolic structure, no less than it breaks hermeneutic interpretation, the ordinary association of ideas, and the imaginary archetype. Because we don’t see much difference among all these things (who could tell what the difference is between a structural, differential opposition and an imaginary archetype whose role is to differentiate itself?).
We believe only in a Kafka that is neither imaginary nor symbolic. We believe only in one or more Kafka machines that are neither structure nor phantasm. We believe only in a Kafka experimentation that is without interpretation or significance and rests only on tests of experience: “I am not appealing for any man’s verdict, I am only imparting knowledge, I am only making a report. To you also, honored Members of the Academy, I have only made a report.” (…)
Desire is not form, but a procedure, a process.»
– Deleuze & Guattari, “Kafka…”