”The thing called power is characterized by immanence of field without transcendent unification, continuity of line without global centralization, and contiguity of parts without distinct totalization: it is a social space" (Gilles Deleuze, 27). If we elaborate on Deleuze’s definition of power, I interpret it as something that is inherent in all fields and all situations, but it is not centralized or unified. It is constantly being negotiated and discussed by actors such as political parties, companies and individuals. Deleuze argues furthermore that power “has no essence; it is simply operational.” (27). Power is thus neither exterior nor super-structural, but rather something that is negotiated in the social space; in fact Deleuze suggests that it indeed is a social space, not lending itself to anyone in particular, except those who seize it and those who oppose it. It is the relationship between different actors, the power relations and battles, as well as the use and abuse of power, that I will explore in my dissertation.
And yes, I'll probably write and rewrite forever and ever.