Isn’t what we call a ‘rhizome’ here rather a sequence of infinitesimally small ‘old oak trees’?
What if Foucault, Deleuze and Co. had – rather than proposing a radically different approach to reality – only changed scale from ‘singular’ and ‘final’ macro-satisfaction to ‘multiple’ and ‘continuous’ micro-satisfactions, not making the slightest change to satisfaction as such?
What if we asked: What is ‘indifference’ as opposed to ‘identity’? And then, what does it require from us to make A and B not differ? And what’s the role of satisfaction in this work of equality through indifference rather than through identity?
In the cycle of life, life does not happen on the line from father to seed to son, from old oak tree to seed to young oak tree, but rather on the surface inscribed within these lines, a surface not directly accessible by those on the line, however, a surface inseparable from the line and those on it.
This surface emerges as an inevitable result of any free making and construction, however, it can not be constructed as such. This surface of non-construction is just there, has always been there. Our only possible relation to it is to make it not differ from our lives and thus make it matter.
There is always both satisfaction and appreciation, simultaneously, and there is no difference between an old oak tree and a rhizome: the difference is in the air when we smell mushrooms after rain.