[‘a pleasant example of code surplus value: perversion among orchids’]
Feb-March 1972 [AO has been published at this point]
Flow continuity is symmetrical to the possibility of a break.
A flow is separated from other flows insofar as it can be the object of a _single_ type of break. I.e. it is traversed by a single, consistent break. Flows imply coded breaks. What separates one flow from another is the coded chain that controls it, marking its own type of break. This break is purely ideational since it can’t be actualized except by the irruption of an _other_ machine that will expose it in its immanence. Planes of consistency don’t distinguish between hylés of different flows anymore. it doesn’t matter material the flows are made of. It doesn’t’ matter what the intercoding is, or the code surplus value. It is only interested in code differentials. Code to the nth degree. Establishment of deterriotorialized signs whose material tends towards abolition (principle of differential calculus and point-sign “matter” from one sign to the other: a passage from the inkblot to the essence of difference). On the level of the plane of consistency there are not flows but _one_ single flow: sign flows going the way of deterritorialization that gnaws at everything, contaminates everything, in its infinite dispersion.
Maybe we shouldn’t make multiplicity [multiplicité] a substantive but a verb: multiplicitate [multipliciter].
Productive proliferation of the power sign. Comrade Althusser’s idea of a process without a subject.
We have to oppose the _constitution_ of strata to the continuous transfinite planes of axiomatic consistency.
-The Anti-Oedipus Papers, 360-1
## – Reads well with “Militant Incidences” p176-187 which takes a ‘machinic code’ approach to production.