THE METAMODELIZATION OF FÉLIX GUATTARI
She defines the relationships between the different domains as such, that:
“the Phyla supply the plans and diagrams, which must be realized in the matter and energy of the Flows. [...] The full cycle of assemblages is not complete until the Universes and Territories also become involved, incorporating both machinic proto-subjectivity and human experience.” (Watson 2009, 131)
The question of nondiscursive matter is essential, aside from the discursive signification. In addition to the horizontal division between real, potential or reterritorializing and deterritorializing, Guattari’s map is divided vertically, as such that:
“Quantity belongs to scientific, method and the discursive, economic, rule-driven side of the Phyla and the Flows on the left side of the graph. Qualities are the concern of philosophy, aesthetics and subjectivity, which are located on the side of Territories and Universes on the right side of the graph.” (Watson 2009, 124)
The vertical division corresponds to the division between objective and subjective: the left side deals with the ‘given’ while right side is the domain of the ‘logic of body without organs’. (Watson 2009, 125) Artistic processes dealing only with semiotic significations and working with power and language, consequently produce more signification. However, without taking the right side of Universes and Territories into consideration – the virtual and potential – we are replicating already existing flows. In turn, artistic practice cannot reside only in the domain of potential Territories and Universes, since it requires some machines, in other words significations and material flows of the real. In order to produce changes and transformations both in the singular, existential territory or ‘how life seems’ and in the relationships between the organizing power of machines and material fluxes. Thus, practice ought to consider both signification and asignified potentials.
We could think of an affect, how it traverses from the potential and virtual Universe through signifying Machines, which utilize the Fluxes of the corporeal, linguistic or relational. Therefore, affect alters the existential territory without direct signification, but requires support in doing so, in other words some aesthetic formations and aesthetic machines. They give form to the material fluxes and enable changes in the existential territory.
With some differences, the four domains correspond to Aristotle’s’ four causes ensuing: causa materialis describes the Flows (F) of matter, libido, capital, signification, labour; causa formalis, the abstract machinic Phylum (Φ); causa finalis, the referential Universes (U); and causa efficiens existential Territories, which include selfhood (T). (Watson 2009, 128-129) Machines are not only abstract but also technological. Watson defines the difference between the Heidegger’s reading of four causes (1977, 289-291) and Guattari’s rather different take on them:
“he is always quick to point out that machines cannot attain existential consistency without the active involvement of Universes and Territories. In the final schema of the main text of Cartographies, Guattari maps his four ontological functors onto Aristotle’s four causes.” (Watson 2009, 128-129)