The Arts in Deleuzian Nomad Thought and Sedentary Thought: A Shocking Mind Exploration

By Bukhan Purvan Zayabat

Introduction: Deleuzian Nomad Thought and Sedentary Thought in Art

Objective: The contrasting frameworks of Deleuzian nomad thought and sedentary thought form two radically divergent views on existence, culture, and creativity. Understanding these distinctions offers a profound perspective on how art operates within and between them, creating worlds that are either bound by structures or defined by movement, freedom, and fluidity.

Deleuze and his collaborator, Félix Guattari, proposed a vision of reality that is dynamic, embracing flux, and resistant to fixed categorization. Nomad thought represents this fluidity: a philosophy that dismantles rigid hierarchies, and instead, celebrates multiplicity, change, and "lines of flight"—ways of escaping and evolving beyond established limits. In contrast, sedentary thought, rooted in traditional Western philosophy, embodies the ethos of order, categorization, and permanence. It is a system that sees truth, identity, and art as fixed forms, privileging unity and stability over transformation and experimentation. Within these two philosophies, the arts become not only reflective but performative, shaping and reshaping reality.

Understanding the arts through these frameworks becomes an exercise in understanding human consciousness and culture itself. How we see the world, how we assign meaning, and how we perceive beauty, values, and identity are all fundamentally shaped by the structures we use to frame them. As such, the arts—whether visual, literary, or performative—are critical to comprehending these thought systems. They become spaces where the rigidity of sedentary thought can be challenged or where the flow of nomad thought can be expressed. Art serves as both a?mirror and catalyst, revealing the potentials of each worldview. And within the differences between nomad and sedentary thinking, we can uncover the essence of what it means to "be" versus what it means to "become."

Thesis: Art manifests uniquely within nomad and sedentary frameworks, shaping and being shaped by their underlying concepts of beauty, value, power, becoming, and what Deleuze would call the creation of a "new human" in a "new world." Art within nomad thought is characterized by fluidity, multiplicity, and the constant push toward transformation. It is art as a "war machine," a force of liberation that resists traditional structures. In contrast, sedentary thought seeks to stabilize, define, and enclose art within boundaries, assigning it specific functions and meanings. These distinctions provide us with not only an understanding of art's possibilities but also a blueprint for a transformative new world, where art leads the way to new modes of existence and consciousness.

Defining Deleuzian Nomad Thought and Sedentary Thought

In order to understand the difference between Deleuzian nomad thought and sedentary thought, we must first explore the foundational metaphysical and epistemological contrasts between these frameworks. Nomad thought, as Deleuze describes, resists structure and definition; it is an ethos of movement, change, and potentiality, an approach to life that acknowledges the primacy of becoming over being. This thought system is characterized by a fluid identity, an embrace of multiplicity, and an inherent openness to difference. There are no final truths, and?no ultimate answers in nomad thought—only processes, encounters, and transformations. Nomad thought views identity as a transitory construct, always in a state of evolution, and understands existence as a series of "lines of flight," or vectors of escape from what is fixed and known.

Sedentary thought, on the other hand, represents a more traditional, stable way of perceiving reality. This thought system privileges unity, stasis, and order. Identity is something to be known, classified, and preserved. Reality itself is understood as something that can be captured, dissected, and organized into coherent systems. Sedentary thought is aligned with structures of power that reinforce societal norms and values, often through the use of boundaries, laws, and categorizations. Art, within this system, becomes a tool for the state—a means of representing, legitimizing, and reinforcing established structures and truths. It is art as a "monument," a celebration of permanence and continuity.

Whereas nomad thought thrives on deterritorialization, challenging and escaping boundaries, sedentary thought finds comfort in reterritorialization, in returning to order and re-establishing borders. Art within each system thus reflects its inherent values: Nomad art as a disruptive force, a challenge to the status quo, and sedentary art as a preservative, something that seeks to make beauty, truth, and value durable.

The Importance of Art in Thought Systems

Art becomes essential in these frameworks because it acts as a direct representation of how a society or culture understands itself, its values, and its potential future. In the context of sedentary thought, art is often used as a means of control—a way to codify what is "good," "beautiful," and "true." Art in a sedentary framework serves as a mirror to an idealized, stable reality. It is something that can be understood, categorized, and replicated. The sedentary framework, in this way, is deeply connected to notions of representation, a system in which art reproduces and affirms what already exists. There is less space for radical change or newness in this context; art within sedentary thought operates to support and reinforce a reality that is already known and accepted.

In nomad thought, however, art holds a different significance. Art becomes a means of breaking free from pre-existing forms and creating something radically new. Art is not bound to represent a fixed reality; instead, it becomes an experimental field where meaning, value, and identity can all be reimagined. In this sense, art in the nomad framework is aligned with Deleuze's concept of the "war machine"—a force of resistance and disruption. Rather than serving established powers, art becomes a line of flight, a means of escaping conventional modes of understanding and being. It exists not to reflect the world as it is but to envision the world as it could be.

This capacity of art to either uphold or destabilize reality is what makes it so central to our understanding of these frameworks. Art is where these theories are put into practice; it is a field of contestation and creation, one that can affirm or challenge our most deeply held beliefs about existence and meaning. Art thus provides a lens through which we can see the full impact of these thought systems on the world.

Thesis: Art as Shaped by Nomad and Sedentary Thought

This essay argues that art manifests uniquely within each framework, expressing and reinforcing the core tenets of both nomad and sedentary thought. Art within the sedentary framework is inherently conservative, oriented toward stability and perpetuating existing structures. It is art as a monument—a celebration of a particular vision of beauty, value, and truth that is meant to endure over time. Sedentary art, in this sense, is linked to the ideals of beauty, happiness, goodness, and truth as stable, attainable concepts. It values harmony, proportion, and the power to reflect an orderly reality. Art in sedentary thought is less concerned with transformation and more focused on preservation, reinforcing a specific worldview and affirming the established hierarchy of values.

Nomad art, by contrast, embodies the ethos of becoming, multiplicity, and disruption. It is art that seeks to question and destabilize, to create spaces where new values and meanings can emerge. Beauty, in this context, is no longer a stable concept but something fluid and open-ended, defined through change and experiment. Art in nomad thought does not conform to traditional notions of aesthetics or truth; instead, it challenges these notions, creating an experience that can be shocking, unsettling, or transformative. It is the?art that embraces "creative destruction," the idea that by breaking down old forms, new possibilities can arise. The power within nomad art is not centralized or hierarchical; it is diffused and shared, a force that allows for multiple interpretations and understandings. Art within this framework becomes a space for exploring difference, repetition, and the ever-evolving potential of virtuality and actuality, blurring the lines between what is imagined and what is real.

Art in both frameworks ultimately shapes what it means to be human. In the sedentary system, art creates and upholds an image of the "good citizen," a person who adheres to established norms and values. The "new human" in this context is an idealized figure who exists within a stable society, reinforcing its ideals. In the nomad framework, however, art points to a new kind of human, one who is constantly evolving, open to new experiences, and capable of imagining a "new world" that transcends traditional boundaries. This new human is a figure of becoming, an individual who is not defined by a single identity or place but by the potential to always transform.

In summary, the arts reveal the tensions and possibilities within each thought system. Through art, nomad thought unveils a world of flux, potential, and creativity, challenging the static ideals of sedentary thought. The two frameworks provide distinct lenses for viewing existence, and art serves as a powerful medium for these philosophies to take shape and affect the world around us. Art becomes not only a reflection of these ideas but a driving force in creating and imagining a new world and new modes of human existence. The impact of these differences on art is profound, as it allows us to consider how we might break free from established norms and envision entirely new possibilities for the human experience.

II. The Fundamental Differences between Nomad Thought and Sedentary Thought

In Deleuze’s philosophical framework, the dichotomy between nomad and sedentary thought captures the tension between movement and stasis, fluidity and fixity, and becoming versus being. Nomad thought, as Deleuze and Guattari elaborate in A Thousand Plateaus, aligns with a world of constant change and multiplicity, where life unfolds through transformations and disruptions rather than a linear, static path. Sedentary thought, on the other hand, aligns with structures that promote stability, uniformity, and identity, aiming to uphold established norms and values. The arts—manifesting as reflections of either movement or permanence—illustrate how each system’s vision of the world and the self shapes creative expression in transformative and startlingly different ways.

Nomad Thought: Movement, Fluidity, and Multiplicity

Deleuze’s concept of nomad thought revolves around the rejection of fixed, centralized truths in favor of a world defined by flux and interconnectedness. Nomad thought sees the self and the world as in continuous states of “becoming” rather than rigid “being,” underscoring that there are no final forms, no single truths, and no permanent identities. The world is an open space where meaning emerges through multiplicity and variation, and where every entity is inextricably bound to the processes around it.

Movement as a State of Being

In nomad thought, movement is more than just physical relocation; it is the essence of existence itself. Life is a flow, a constant navigation of forces and contexts that defy any fixed point of reference. This movement is about deterritorialization—the breaking down of established forms, roles, and boundaries. A Nomad perspective does not settle into categories or labels; rather, it perpetually questions, adapts and transforms in response to new conditions. Nomad movement is subversive because it disrupts the structures that sedentary thought takes for granted, such as borders, hierarchies, and identities.

For Deleuze, nomad thought is exemplified by the figure of the “war machine,” a concept that conveys an open-ended force of creation that opposes the rigidity of the State’s structured thought. The war machine is not about violence but about resistance to standardization and control. In this way, nomad thought, aligned with the war machine, aims to dismantle predefined ideas, decentralizing knowledge and dispersing power. It seeks not to conquer or stabilize, but to perpetuate the creative process of difference and becoming.

Fluidity and Rhizomatic Connections

Nomad thought is also characterized by its rhizomatic structure, as opposed to the arborescent (tree-like) model found in sedentary thought. The rhizome, a concept borrowed from botany, is a network of interconnected roots that has no single point of origin, no hierarchical organization, and no fixed end. Just as the rhizome grows and branches in all directions, nomad thought is horizontal and non-linear. It does not follow a singular narrative or trajectory but instead embraces diverse possibilities and perspectives.

In the arts, this fluidity and interconnectedness manifest as an embrace of interdisciplinary practices, experimental forms, and non-hierarchical collaborations. Art created within a nomad framework resists categorization, blending genres and defying conventional structures. For example, works that merge visual, auditory, and performative elements reflect a rhizomatic approach, where meaning is generated through the interplay of multiple modes of expression rather than a single authoritative voice. In nomad art, every part is connected to every other part, and there is no final destination or definitive interpretation—only an open field of potential.

Multiplicity and the Philosophy of Becoming

At the heart of nomad thought is Deleuze’s notion of “becoming.” Unlike “being,” which implies a fixed and enduring identity, “becoming” suggests a continuous evolution that never reaches a conclusion. Becoming is transformative and immanent—it happens in real-time, within the flow of experience itself. For nomad thought, identity is not a given or a goal but a fluid, transient state that reflects the interactions between forces and contexts. This embrace of multiplicity means that the self is seen not as a singular entity but as a constellation of possibilities and perspectives, each as valid and real as the next.

In artistic terms, this philosophy of becoming fosters art that values process over product, emphasizing experimentation and the unfolding of creativity rather than a final, perfected outcome. Art in nomad thought is often open-ended, inviting the audience to engage in its creation rather than passively consume it. It celebrates the unfinished, the imperfect, and the transient. Works such as immersive installations or interactive performances exemplify this emphasis on becoming, as they transform based on the viewer’s presence and participation. In this way, nomad art is always evolving, never settling into a single interpretation, and always embodying the principle of multiplicity.

Sedentary Thought: Structures of Order, Stability, and Identity

Sedentary thought, by contrast, is rooted in a vision of the world as orderly, fixed, and stable. This framework values structures that define and reinforce identity, aiming to preserve established norms and boundaries. Sedentary thought emphasizes “being” over “becoming,” viewing existence as a series of stable identities and roles that exist within a structured hierarchy. Whereas nomad thought is open and decentralized, sedentary thought seeks closure and authority, favoring a clear separation between what is “inside” and “outside,” “known” and “unknown.”

Order and Stability as Fundamental Values

At the core of sedentary thought is the need for order and stability. This perspective is closely aligned with the concept of the State, which imposes laws, norms, and classifications to maintain control and predictability. Sedentary thought is territorial: it creates boundaries and categories to organize the world and ensure its own permanence. Knowledge, under sedentary thought, is standardized, with clear origins, rules, and authorities.

In art, sedentary thought manifests as a preference for classical forms, clear narratives, and enduring themes. Artworks that adhere to traditional genres—such as portraiture, landscapes, and historical paintings—reflect a sedentary desire to preserve culture, honor heritage, and maintain aesthetic standards. These artworks often strive for perfection and harmony, emphasizing symmetry, balance, and proportion as ideals. In this way, art in sedentary thought aligns with values of stability and order, seeking to represent reality in a way that reaffirms the coherence and unity of the world.

Identity and Fixed Values

Sedentary thought is also deeply invested in the notion of identity as a stable and singular concept. It holds that each person, place, or object has a fixed essence that defines it, and this essence can be understood and categorized. Identity, in sedentary thought, is not a process but an end goal; it is something to be discovered and preserved, not continuously redefined. This framework views categories—such as nationality, gender, and social class—as integral to understanding and ordering the world.

In artistic expression, this emphasis on identity and fixed values is reflected in works that highlight cultural heritage, historical memory, and collective values. Art becomes a medium for defining and preserving identity, often portraying people and places in ways that reinforce societal norms and roles. Portraits, historical scenes, and monuments become instruments of cultural memory, affirming a collective sense of self and belonging. Unlike nomad art, which is open to multiple interpretations, sedentary art often seeks a clear, unambiguous message, reinforcing the coherence of identity and community.

Boundaries and Hierarchies in the Creative Process

Boundaries and hierarchies are essential to sedentary thought’s approach to knowledge and power. Sedentary thought sees the world as inherently stratified, with hierarchies that separate the sacred from the profane, the powerful from the powerless, and?the civilized from the wild. In sedentary art, boundaries are clear-cut, often marked by distinct genres, techniques, and thematic boundaries. Art is seen as a tool for maintaining social boundaries, expressing collective values, and upholding hierarchies rather than questioning or dismantling them.

For example, classical works in Western art history were often commissioned by institutions such as the church, monarchy, or state, each with a vested interest in maintaining societal order and hierarchy. These works frequently conveyed ideals of nobility, divine authority, and moral virtue, reinforcing the status quo and communicating a vision of the world that was orderly and knowable. The creative process in sedentary thought thus prioritizes respect for tradition, continuity, and discipline, seeing art as a reflection of a world that is stable, structured, and predictable.

Art as Reflective of Thought: Nomad Versus Sedentary Expressions

Art serves as a powerful reflection of the philosophical underpinnings of both nomad and sedentary thought. While nomad art disrupts, transforms, and questions, sedentary art preserves, organizes, and affirms. The forms and methods of each artistic approach reveal the deeper assumptions about existence, identity, and knowledge embedded within each thought system.

Nomad Art: The Art of Disruption and Becoming

In a nomad framework, art becomes a tool for exploring the unknown, a vehicle for constant reinvention. Nomad art thrives in spaces where conventional boundaries dissolve, embracing interdisciplinary collaborations, improvisational forms, and participatory installations. It breaks from traditional genres and often invites viewers to co-create meaning, becoming part of the work themselves. This approach mirrors the nomad ethos of multiplicity, where each encounter with the artwork generates a new experience and understanding. The open-ended nature of nomad art also reflects the principle of becoming, as each viewing, interaction, or performance offers something unique, never to be repeated in the same way.

Consider the immersive installations of artists like Yayoi Kusama or the performance pieces of Marina Abramovi?, where the boundaries between artist, viewer, and artwork dissolve. These works invite participants to inhabit a state of becoming, disrupting their sense of identity and challenging preconceived notions about art and reality. The audience, rather than being a passive observer, becomes a part of the creative process, mirroring the rhizomatic structure of nomad thought.

Sedentary Art: The Art of Preservation and Identity

Sedentary art, in contrast, is deeply rooted in tradition and often upholds a society’s values, histories, and identities. This art form tends to emphasize permanence, order, and clarity, preserving cultural heritage and reaffirming established truths. Portraiture, realist painting, and classical sculpture exemplify sedentary art’s alignment with stability, aiming to capture the world as it “truly is” according to shared social ideals.

For instance, classical portraiture often portrays individuals with symbols of their social status, capturing an idealized identity that resonates with sedentary values. These works of art affirm the viewer’s sense of continuity and place within a stable society, reinforcing the idea that identity and reality are fixed and knowable. In a world defined by sedentary thought, art thus becomes a mirror, reflecting and reinforcing the hierarchies and boundaries that organize social life.

In summary, the differences between nomad thought and sedentary thought in Deleuze’s philosophy reveal two radically different ways of understanding the world, oneself, and art. Nomad thought, with its emphasis on movement, fluidity, and becoming, envisions art as an ever-changing, participatory process that invites viewers to enter into states of multiplicity and transformation. Sedentary thought, with its focus on stability, order, and identity, sees art as a reflection of established truths and values, aiming to reinforce a coherent, organized world. By exploring these distinctions, we uncover the power of art not only to express philosophical ideas but to actively shape the ways we understand and inhabit our worlds. Art, in both frameworks, emerges as a means of grappling with reality, either by affirming its established contours or by pushing beyond them into new, uncharted territories.

III. Key Concepts and Their Artistic Implications in Nomad and Sedentary Thought

The dual framework of nomad and sedentary thought leads us to radically different interpretations of key values. From beauty to power, each concept transforms as it shifts between a fluid, open-ended view and a static, hierarchical one. When seen through Deleuzian thought, art reveals these distinctions in powerful, mind-altering ways, not just as reflections of ideals but as active agents in shaping consciousness.

1. Beauty

Nomad Thought: In nomad thought, beauty is an unfolding, mutable experience rather than a fixed ideal. It is the process of becoming that makes something beautiful, not the adherence to any specific form. This beauty is often transitory, always on the edge of dissolving into something new. Nomad beauty might be found in the jagged lines of graffiti on urban walls, the chaos of abstract expressionism, or the haunting impermanence of street performance. In this view, beauty is alive, embodied in the change and flux that resists definition. It thrives in movement, transition, and transformation. For the nomad, beauty lies in accepting the ephemeral, in appreciating a moment that cannot be recreated.

Art, within this framework, is not about the end result but about the dynamic process that brought it to life. An installation might be altered by weather or dismantled piece by piece, inviting the viewer into the impermanent dance. This understanding of beauty challenges conventional standards by subverting stability and completion; it dismantles the conventional perception of beauty as symmetry or permanence, replacing it with the “becoming” of a work that resists finality. This beauty demands that the observer surrender to change, dissolving distinctions between artist, object, and environment. Art in nomad thought exemplifies beauty’s fluidity, celebrating its capacity to elude capture.

Sedentary Thought: Sedentary thought, in contrast, views beauty as harmonious, ordered, and timeless. Beauty is fixed, representing the eternal rather than the ephemeral, with roots in classical ideals that prioritize symmetry, proportion, and balance. This beauty embodies a stable ideal, something that can be aspired to and universally acknowledged. A sedentary beauty might be found in the enduring forms of classical architecture, the pristine symmetry of Renaissance paintings, or the meticulous realism of neoclassical sculpture.

In sedentary thought, art is a quest for the perfect form, the realization of universal beauty. Artworks here are polished, curated, and?often monumental. Their purpose is to evoke admiration and respect for unchanging ideals, each piece striving toward a transcendent truth. Beauty in sedentary thought becomes a standard to measure against, and its art becomes a tribute to this unyielding pursuit. The sedentary ideal, then, is both a framework of form and a framework of value, a mirror of eternal, universal truths designed to endure beyond time and place.

2. Happiness

Nomad Thought: For nomad thought, happiness is a state of continual becoming, inseparable from the act of exploration and experimentation. Happiness is not a destination but a byproduct of creative freedom, adaptability, and openness to new experiences. It emerges in the journey, not in the attainment of a fixed end. This happiness defies sedentary definitions, appearing chaotic and perhaps even unsettling to those seeking stability. In the nomad approach, the happiness derived from art is akin to the exhilaration of the unknown, of encountering new forms and meanings that continually reshape the self.

In artistic terms, this approach to happiness celebrates spontaneity, chance, and process. A nomad artwork might involve audience participation or improvisation, where happiness arises from unpredictability. Happiness here isn’t about calm satisfaction but the thrill of potential—the excitement that there are no boundaries or certainties, only a horizon of endless possibilities. It’s a form of joy that is uncontainable, that feeds on transformation, and thrives in flux, where meaning and experience are unbound by tradition or expectation.

Sedentary Thought: Sedentary thought places happiness in relation to stability, fulfillment, and alignment with social values. Happiness, in this perspective, is a sense of inner contentment derived from meeting established ideals—both personal and collective. It is a static concept, something to be attained and held onto, aligning with the social norms that define a good life. Here, happiness in art might manifest as beauty that soothes, narratives that reinforce moral clarity, or forms that invoke a deep sense of order and peace.

Sedentary happiness in art reflects the satisfaction of familiarity, where works are completed and refined, offering closure and coherence. Art brings happiness when it reinforces the known, stabilizes meaning and affirms societal values. This happiness is comforting, a feeling of arriving rather than an impetus to continue moving. It’s the happiness of reaching completion, grounded in ideals that provide certainty, values that remain constant, and forms that echo a sense of eternal repose.

3. Goodness and Rights

Nomad Thought: Nomad thought radically redefines concepts of goodness and rights. Goodness here is situational, not determined by overarching moral codes but by context, creativity, and the multiplicity of value systems. Instead of a static morality, it embraces ethical fluidity, adapting to the moment and the environment. This ethical openness allows for a range of interpretations and responses, recognizing the legitimacy of diverse perspectives. In nomad art, goodness could be expressed as subversion, an act that questions established norms to reveal hidden injustices or truths. Rights, too, are reimagined: they are less about rigid legal structures and more about the autonomy of each entity to define its place.

In art, this vision manifests in pieces that challenge viewers to question norms and redefine their moral frameworks. It may present uncomfortable truths or expose contradictions in accepted values. Nomad goodness isn’t about conforming but about confronting; it values art’s ability to provoke, dismantle, and question. Nomad art acts as a provocateur, asserting the right to redefine morality based on lived experience and the immediate context.

Sedentary Thought: Sedentary thought views goodness as an adherence to established moral principles and rights as codified laws protecting social order. This goodness is built on well-defined ethical codes, where morality is guided by long-standing traditions and legal frameworks. Art here serves as a medium to reinforce these values, promoting ideals of justice, order, and societal well-being. In this view, art’s role is to affirm these principles, portraying goodness as a universal standard that upholds and dignifies human life.

Sedentary art often reflects this commitment to order and morality through themes of virtue, heroism, or social duty. Its narratives and aesthetics uphold a sense of justice and serve as a reminder of society’s ethical foundation. Goodness in sedentary thought is synonymous with conformity to the social contract, while art becomes a means of affirming the security and predictability of established rights.

4. Truth and Meaning

Nomad Thought: Nomad thought embraces a fluid, subjective view of truth, seeing it as something contextual and evolving. Truth is not static but dynamic, revealed through diverse perspectives and experiences. In this framework, meaning is constructed, deconstructed, and reconstructed within shifting contexts. Art, then, becomes a medium through which transient realities are explored, celebrating ambiguity, contradiction, and complexity. Nomad truth does not aim to “capture” reality but to open new spaces for interpretation, inviting viewers to encounter multiple truths simultaneously.

Art in this view might reject clear narratives or cohesive images, favoring instead abstract or fragmented forms. The meaning of a nomad artwork is found in its refusal to settle; it is ever-elusive, mirroring the notion that truth is constantly in flux. Art here serves as a challenge to singular interpretations, offering instead a layered, multi-dimensional approach that honors subjective truth and revels in the complexity of meaning.

Sedentary Thought: Sedentary thought sees truth as objective, enduring, and accessible through rational understanding. Meaning is stable, something to be discovered rather than created, and it is often tied to universal principles or objective reality. In sedentary thought, art’s purpose is to mirror this truth, to distill and communicate insights about the world that align with shared human experiences. Art becomes a reflection of this reality, a means to solidify meaning rather than question it.

In this view, art often upholds realism, clarity, and coherence. It might tell stories with clear beginnings, middles, and ends, providing the audience with a comforting sense of completion. Truth here is an anchor, and meaning a compass; together, they provide stability, allowing art to reinforce a coherent view of reality. Sedentary art offers certainties rather than questions, favoring narratives that affirm a shared understanding of the world.

5. Power

Nomad Thought: Power in nomad thought is decentralized, constantly shifting, and inherently creative. It does not consolidate but disperses, emerging from intersections and interconnections rather than hierarchies. This power is seen in the movement of ideas, in the ability to traverse boundaries and redefine spaces. It is a power of deterritorialization, where art itself becomes a “war machine” capable of dismantling established structures. In nomad thought, art is both an expression of power and a tool to subvert it. This power is anarchic, and?disruptive, arising from the freedom to challenge, reinterpret, and reimagine.

Nomad art embodies this power through its refusal to conform, often taking on forms that resist commodification or institutionalization. It thrives in underground movements, in guerrilla art, or in performances that disrupt public spaces. This art is not made to be contained or preserved; it is meant to provoke, to change perceptions, to inspire new lines of flight. It reflects a power that does not build walls but dissolves them, a force that disrupts the status quo and ignites new possibilities.

Sedentary Thought: Power in sedentary thought is hierarchical, consolidating authority and structure. It supports order, control, and stability, often manifesting through centralized institutions such as the state, the church, or the market. In this framework, power is associated with the ability to maintain and enforce social norms, uphold laws, and control resources. Sedentary art serves as a reinforcement of these power structures, working within the established norms to affirm and justify them.

Art in this context often upholds the values of authority and stability, reinforcing social hierarchies and existing power structures. It might serve as propaganda, elevating the status of the ruling class or bolstering national pride. Sedentary art reflects the power of preservation, of maintaining order and control, often by reinforcing traditional values and ideals.

This analysis of beauty, happiness, goodness, truth, and power highlights the ways in which nomad and sedentary thoughts shape our understanding of art, values, and the human condition. Where sedentary thought seeks to preserve, define, and stabilize, nomad thought calls for deconstruction, transformation, and the constant evolution of meaning. Through these lenses, art becomes a profound vehicle for both questioning and affirming the forces that govern our existence.

IV. Deleuzian Concepts in Art and Their Role in Each Framework

In this section, we explore how key Deleuzian concepts—becoming and difference, repetition and new history, virtuality and actualization, and immanence and rhizome—play out in the realm of art and how they manifest differently within the frameworks of nomad thought and sedentary thought. Through this lens, art serves as a powerful medium to express, embody, and subvert the foundational principles that shape these two contrasting modes of thought.

1. Becoming and Difference

Nomad Thought: Art as an Expression of Continual Becoming, Embracing Difference and Multiplicity

In the context of nomad thought, the notion of becoming is central. Deleuze's concept of becoming refers to a dynamic, ongoing process of transformation, where identity and form are never fixed but always in flux. This concept radically contrasts with traditional, static notions of being, which emphasize stability, permanence, and coherence. In a nomad framework, art does not simply represent the world; it embodies the very process of becoming. Art is not a static image or a finished product; it is an active force, a continual movement that opens up possibilities, challenges boundaries, and embraces the fluidity of existence.

Nomad art rejects any idea of an absolute or final identity. Instead, it foregrounds difference and multiplicity—a?difference not in the sense of mere deviation from a norm, but as a positive, productive force that enables the generation of new identities, new ideas, and new experiences. In nomad thought, art becomes a vehicle for the expression of difference, capturing the essence of change rather than stasis. This art encourages the viewer to see the world not as a fixed set of objects or categories but as an interconnected flow of diverse potentialities.

For example, abstract art, particularly in its radical forms, embodies this spirit of becoming. Abstract art does not attempt to represent a stable, recognizable world; rather, it disrupts our expectations, pushing us to engage with the world in a non-representational way. Artists like Jackson Pollock with his splattered canvases or Mark Rothko with his color fields create works that resist being pinned down to fixed meanings. These works insist on the viewer’s engagement in an ongoing process of becoming, where every glance is an opportunity to discover something new, to feel a shift in perception. Here, the artwork itself becomes a living, breathing entity, changing as it is viewed, interpreted, and reinterpreted across time.

In this nomad sense, art serves as a line of flight, breaking away from the constraints of traditional forms and expectations. It does not capture the world as it is but opens up new lines of escape from conventional thinking and perception. The artist, much like the nomad subject, is always on the move, always in a state of flux. There is no finality, no closure in the artwork—only becoming.

Sedentary Thought: Art as Preserving Sameness and Identity, Reinforcing the Established Order

In contrast, sedentary thought is based on a stable, ordered view of existence where identity is fixed and unchanging. In this framework, art serves to preserve sameness, reaffirming established values, identities, and norms. Art in the sedentary mode functions as a reifier of the status quo, serving as a tool to reinforce the existing power structures, social hierarchies, and moral frameworks.

Where nomad art embraces difference, sedentary art tends to favor identity, emphasizing the preservation of the self, the nation, the culture, and tradition. Art, in this view, is something to be consumed, interpreted, and understood within the constraints of predefined categories and narratives. The artist, rather than being an agent of radical transformation, becomes a guardian of tradition, producing works that conform to established stylistic conventions and social expectations. Art under sedentary thought operates within boundaries that are meant to protect the integrity of culture and history, often serving to validate and perpetuate established ways of life.

For example, classical portraiture serves as a quintessential example of this art form. Portraits from the Renaissance or the Baroque period, such as those by Rembrandt or Leonardo da Vinci, often depict individuals in fixed, idealized forms. These artworks seek to preserve and enhance the identity of the subject, whether a monarch, a religious figure, or an aristocrat. The subject is rendered in their most dignified, eternal state, untouched by the passage of time. The artwork is a testament to the power, wealth, or virtue of its subject, reinforcing the societal structures that support it.

This type of art serves as a form of cultural continuity, preserving the values, ideals, and identities that have been handed down through generations. There is little room for subversion or radical change; instead, the artwork upholds and celebrates a fixed notion of identity, whether individual or collective. In sedentary thought, art is a tool for stasis, not transformation.

2. Repetition and New History

Nomad Thought: Repetition as a Form of Creative Destruction, Generating New Possibilities

In Deleuzian nomad thought, repetition is not a mere echo of the past; rather, it is an active force of creative destruction. Repetition is understood as a repetition of difference, a force that disrupts the conventional flow of time and history. Far from being a mere return to the same, repetition, in the nomad sense, is a multiplicative force that opens up new possibilities. In the context of art, repetition allows for the creation of new meanings, new ideas, and new experiences. It is not a static replication but a dynamic process that challenges fixed definitions and invites new interpretations.

This creative destruction operates by breaking the chains of tradition and enabling new configurations. Every repetition is an opportunity to create something fresh, something that transcends the past rather than reinforcing it. The artwork, in this sense, does not merely repeat the known but reconfigures it, giving birth to a new history. Artists who work in the spirit of nomad thought, like Marina Abramovi? or Andy Warhol, embrace repetition as a means to destabilize conventional modes of viewing and interpreting the world. Warhol’s famous repetition of images, such as his series of Campbell's Soup Cans, does not repeat the same thing in a simplistic manner but rather transforms it, infusing it with new meaning and significance every time it is viewed.

In this way, repetition under nomad thought becomes a tool for radical innovation. It allows for the dismantling of old structures and the construction of new ones. The repeated image or action is a line of flight, a departure from conventional art, inviting the viewer to see the world in new, unpredictable ways.

Sedentary Thought: Repetition as Tradition, Reinforcing Historical Continuity and Order

In contrast, sedentary thought views repetition as a means of preserving historical continuity and cultural order. In this framework, repetition is an act of maintaining tradition, ensuring that the past is never lost but always repeated and reemphasized. Art serves as a repository of history, repeating the symbols, forms, and narratives that define a culture or society. It is a means of preserving identity and values across generations, reinforcing the connection between the past and the present.

Repetition in sedentary art is often seen as a means of stabilizing the present by tying it to the past. It serves to remind the viewer of the continuity of history, emphasizing the values, ideals, and structures that have sustained societies for centuries. For example, the classical symphonies of Beethoven or the monumental architecture of Neoclassical buildings reinforce the connection to a glorious past, presenting a vision of a world where values and traditions are upheld through time. Repetition in this context serves not to break free from the past but to secure its legacy.

In this sense, art in sedentary thought becomes a preservative mechanism. It is an instrument of social control, reinforcing shared beliefs and norms. The artwork is tied to a fixed lineage, a clear tradition, and serves to reiterate, rather than disrupt, the established order. Repetition is not a tool for innovation but for cultural preservation.

3. Virtuality and Actualization

Nomad Thought: Art Explores Virtual Potentialities, Encouraging Viewers to Imagine New Realities

In Deleuzian philosophy, the distinction between the virtual and the actual is crucial. The virtual is not the opposite of the real but the realm of potentialities—everything that could be but has not yet become. The actual is the world as we experience it, the realm of concrete realities. In nomad thought, art is a vehicle for exploring the virtual realm, presenting viewers with possibilities that transcend the limitations of the actual. It encourages the viewer to step outside of their immediate experience and imagine alternative realities, new futures, and unseen worlds.

Art that engages with the virtual often challenges the viewer’s assumptions about what is possible and what is real. It invites the imagination to wander, to envision worlds that are not yet but might one day be. Works like Salvador Dalí’s surrealist paintings or Frida Kahlo’s dreamlike self-portraits depict worlds where the lines between reality and fantasy blur, opening up spaces for the virtual to become tangible. These artworks do not seek to replicate the world as it is; rather, they ask the viewer to confront the infinite possibilities that lie just beneath the surface of ordinary existence.

Nomad art uses the virtual to expand the boundaries of human experience. It invites the viewer to consider not just what is but what could be, prompting a creative encounter with the unknown.

Sedentary Thought: Art Actualizes Fixed Ideals, Reinforcing a Concrete, Structured Reality

In sedentary thought, the virtual is subordinated to the actual. Art in this framework is concerned with actualizing fixed, pre-existing ideals. It represents an effort to manifest the ideal in concrete forms, reinforcing a structured, ordered view of reality. Art in the sedentary framework is primarily concerned with depicting and preserving the known, whether through classical representations of nature, human figures, or social structures.

Rather than imagining new possibilities, sedentary art reflects the existing state of the world, capturing it in a way that is immediately recognizable and grounded in actuality. It reinforces conventional ideas of beauty, morality, and truth, making the world appear stable and predictable. This kind of art, such as realist painting or portraiture, seeks to capture life as it is, with little room for the virtual or the imagined. It does not ask the viewer to question the reality of the world but instead reinforces that reality by presenting it as stable and complete.

In this sense, art under sedentary thought is primarily concerned with maintaining the present state of affairs, ensuring that the ideals and structures of the actual world are not disrupted. It functions as a mirror, reflecting and solidifying the present state of society rather than inviting transformation or expansion.

4. Immanence and Rhizome

Nomad Thought: Art as Rhizomatic and Interconnected, With No Clear Origin or Endpoint

In Deleuzian philosophy, immanence refers to the idea that reality and meaning are not transcendent but are immanent within the world itself. Similarly, the concept of the rhizome offers a model of reality that is non-hierarchical and multiplicative, without a clear center or endpoint. The rhizome is an underground stem that sends out shoots in all directions, creating new connections and pathways as it grows. It is a model for a networked reality, where everything is interconnected and in constant flux.

In nomad thought, art functions like a rhizome. It is not bound by linear narratives or traditional structures but grows in unexpected directions, connecting seemingly unrelated ideas, forms, and concepts. Nomad art is interconnected, drawing from multiple sources and disciplines, and?breaking down boundaries between genres, mediums, and cultural contexts. It reflects the multiplicity and openness of reality, where meanings and identities are fluid and ever-changing.

Artists like Jean-Michel Basquiat, David Bowie, and the Fluxus movement demonstrate this rhizomatic art, where there is no singular style or fixed message. Instead, the work proliferates across different mediums, ideas, and cultural references, constantly growing and evolving. The rhizomatic structure of these artworks suggests that meaning does not reside in a singular point but emerges from the connections between different elements.

Sedentary Thought: Art Rooted in Structured, Hierarchical Forms With a Clear Lineage of Origin

In contrast, sedentary thought is grounded in a more hierarchical view of reality, where everything has a clear origin, a defined center, and a fixed structure. Art in this framework is often tied to established forms, traditions, and genres, with a clear lineage or history. There is little room for the interconnectedness and fluidity that define nomad art. Instead, art in the sedentary framework is structured and organized, with specific rules and guidelines that artists must follow.

In this sense, sedentary art is about reproducing tradition, reinforcing clear distinctions between genres, forms, and styles. Classical sculpture, Renaissance painting, and neoclassical architecture all embody this vision of art—structured, defined, and linked to a clear historical lineage. These forms do not blur boundaries or suggest endless possibilities but instead offer a sense of stability and order.

The art rooted in sedentary thought operates in a way that mirrors the settled, fixed nature of sedentary existence. It is about continuity, preservation, and identity, reflecting a world that seeks to stay the same, rather than constantly evolve.

In summary, the role of art in nomad and sedentary thought presents a profound contrast. Nomad art is a force of becoming, difference, and transformation, constantly in flux, embracing the unknown and the virtual. It is a creative destruction that moves through repetition and virtuality, disrupting the established order and opening up new possibilities. In contrast, sedentary art is about maintaining the status quo, preserving identity, and actualizing fixed ideals. It repeats tradition, reflects the actual world, and reinforces hierarchical structures.

Through the exploration of becoming and difference, repetition, virtuality, and immanence, we see how art serves as a lens through which we can understand the deeper metaphysical divides between nomad and sedentary thought. Whether as an agent of change or a guardian of tradition, art remains a powerful tool for expressing and shaping the world we inhabit.

V. Art in the Context of the War Machine and Line of Flight

1. War Machine

Nomad Thought: Art as a Disruptive, Deterritorializing Force, Challenging Established Norms

In the Deleuzian framework, the "War Machine" is not merely a tool of violence or military conquest; it represents a conceptual force that escapes the boundaries of state power and challenges existing societal structures. The War Machine operates outside of the organized, hierarchical apparatus of the state and thus becomes an anti-systemic force—a nomad, deterritorializing energy that dismantles the status quo. In nomad thought, art becomes an embodiment of this very force, a medium that disrupts the predictable, the controlled, and the fixed.

Art, in this sense, is not constrained by the norms of culture, morality, or social expectations. It possesses the potential to create ruptures, to generate new possibilities by existing outside the limitations imposed by political or ideological systems. It pushes boundaries and refuses to conform to the established codes of representation. It questions truth, challenges the notion of universal beauty, and offers a multiplicity of interpretations that destabilize normative understandings of reality.

The War Machine, as an external, subversive force, creates "lines of flight"—routes of escape from the dominant systems that define our existence. Art, in its alignment with this War Machine, also becomes a line of flight, offering new pathways, and?new potentialities that cannot be confined to the predefined, sedentary norms.

This form of art is inherently dynamic, constantly shifting, constantly evolving. It mirrors the nomad existence where territory is not owned but continuously traversed. In such art, change is not simply a possibility—it is an inevitability. The artist operates as a nomad, unmoored from the expectations of the art market, the state, or any institutional control. Art becomes a method of creating new worlds, where meaning is fluid, where beauty is constantly redefined, and where the very nature of creativity exists as an act of liberation.

The art that flows from the War Machine disrupts the territories of meaning. In the same way that the nomad resists being defined by fixed categories, so does the artist within this context resist categorization. The War Machine is about breaking through the confines of identity and representation, and the art that emerges from it is a continuous unfolding, a movement away from stasis and fixed forms.

By rejecting established systems and offering something new, art becomes a form of resistance, not only to the political structures of society but also to the very idea of cultural or aesthetic boundaries. The War Machine allows art to stand as a force that threatens to upend the conventional, to destabilize the institutions that hold power in the name of an evolving and constantly shifting reality.

Sedentary Thought: Art as an Extension of the State’s Ideology, Preserving Social Order

In stark contrast, sedentary thought places art squarely within the context of the state, where it serves as an extension of the existing political, social, and cultural order. The state, in its quest for stability and control, seeks to establish structures that manage not only the physical realm but the ideological and cultural dimensions of existence. Art, under sedentary thought, becomes a tool for maintaining social cohesion, reinforcing the legitimacy of power, and ensuring that the population remains in alignment with state ideologies.

Art, in this context, is not disruptive or innovative; rather, it is obedient, predictable, and directed toward reinforcing the existing norms. It serves the purpose of social integration and conformity, emphasizing values that uphold order—values such as nationalism, tradition, and heritage. It becomes a mirror of the state’s ideologies and thus acts as a method of propagating these values throughout society.

This type of art resists change and seeks to fix meaning. It operates within the boundaries defined by institutions such as schools, governments, and religious bodies. In many ways, it supports the status quo, presenting idealized versions of the world that align with the state's narrative of what is "good" or "true." The state's control over art manifests in censorship, patronage, and cultural regulation, ensuring that art does not stray from the path that supports the system's interests.

Rather than challenging norms, art under sedentary thought becomes a vessel through which these norms are perpetuated. Artists may become enmeshed in the bureaucratic machinery of state-supported culture, creating works that align with the vision of national identity, civic virtue, and traditional values. Art no longer operates as a transformative force; instead, it serves the political need to create consensus and maintain order.

In this framework, art loses its radical potential. It becomes a predictable performance that enacts the status quo rather than subverting or destabilizing it. Rather than existing as an escape or a force for change, art under sedentary thought becomes a tool of preservation, a reinforcement of the structures that dominate political, social, and cultural life.

2. Line of Flight

Nomad Thought: Art as a Line of Flight, an Escape from Rigid Forms, Promoting Freedom and Transformation

The concept of the "line of flight" is central to Deleuze and Guattari's philosophy, representing the possibility of escape from the confines of state power and identity structures. In this framework, art becomes not just a means of creative expression, but a literal escape route—a line that leads out of the rigid, the known, and into the unknown. It is a vehicle for freedom, transformation, and the creation of new worlds. Art, in the nomad sense, offers a way out of the established categories that restrict human expression and experience.

The line of flight, like the nomad’s journey, is not a linear or predetermined path. It is a creative act of rupture, breaking away from the conventions that constrain thought and identity. The artist’s role, then, is to trace these lines of flight, to open up spaces of possibility where new ideas can emerge. These lines may take many forms—experimental techniques, subversive aesthetics, or radical political statements. What matters is the intent to escape from the known and embrace the unknown, to open new spaces for thought, action, and existence.

Art as a line of flight is never static; it is a continuous movement away from territorialization, from the desire to fix meaning and identity. It is a form of resistance to the pressures of state power, capital, and societal expectations. Art provides a means to explore and actualize new potentials, creating spaces where difference can thrive, and new possibilities can emerge.

Through the line of flight, art promotes freedom in its purest form—freedom from the constraints of history, tradition, and social conditioning. It invites individuals to leave behind the familiar, to embrace the potentiality of becoming something other, and to challenge the boundaries that define the self and the world.

In this way, art becomes a revolutionary force, a form of resistance that calls into question the very notion of fixed identity, truth, and morality. The line of flight is not just a departure from the old—it is an invitation to create something radically new, to begin again, to move into a future that has not yet been imagined.

Sedentary Thought: Art Contained Within Boundaries, Resisting Escape or Subversion

In contrast to the nomad concept of the line of flight, sedentary thought seeks to limit and contain artistic expression within well-defined boundaries. Art, under this framework, is not an escape from the norms but a reinforcement of them. The state, in its desire for control, imposes boundaries on art, delineating what is acceptable and what is not. These boundaries are both physical (galleries, museums, performance spaces) and ideological (national identity, moral standards, social values).

In this system, art is constrained by categories—beauty, truth, goodness—that have been established by culture and tradition. It operates within the limits of conventional aesthetics and the rules of representation that align with the dominant ideologies. The artist’s role is to operate within these boundaries, either fulfilling the expectations of patrons, the state, or society, or else risk being marginalized.

Art under sedentary thought thus resists subversion. It is bound by expectations of form, genre, and medium. Even avant-garde movements that seek to disrupt artistic conventions often do so within a specific context of accepted norms. For instance, postmodern art may challenge ideas of high art and traditional beauty, but it still operates within the broader framework of Western cultural history and its institutional apparatus.

This containment results in a stifling of creativity. Art becomes a practice of repetition, of revisiting familiar themes and styles, rather than a rupture or revolution. It is not concerned with escaping or rethinking boundaries; rather, it works within them to create works that are palatable, predictable, and safe. In this way, art serves the purposes of socialization and normalization, ensuring that the boundaries of what is acceptable remain intact.

3. Accelerationism Post-Line of Flight

Nomad Thought: Accelerationism as Pushing Limits of Creativity and Innovation, Intensifying Difference and Becoming

Accelerationism, in the context of nomad thought, takes on a radically different meaning. It is the belief that the best way to transcend the limitations of the present is to accelerate and intensify the very processes that define it—capitalism, technology, cultural production, and social change. Far from being a reactionary philosophy that seeks to slow or temper these processes, accelerationism in nomad thought embraces the forces of change and seeks to drive them to their extreme.

In the artistic context, accelerationism becomes a call to push the limits of creativity, to explore new forms, new technologies, and new conceptual frameworks that challenge existing ways of thinking. It is a radical embrace of difference and becoming, an artistic philosophy that demands constant evolution and transformation. Art becomes a force that intensifies the speed of change, opening up new possibilities and new ways of understanding the world.

This approach is aligned with the War Machine and the line of flight. Art, in this sense, becomes a tool of creative destruction—a force that seeks not only to break away from the past but to accelerate the very forces that shape reality. Through this lens, art does not retreat from the chaos of modernity but moves forward into it, embracing the new, the unknown, and the uncharted.

The goal of art in accelerationism is not to create stability or a return to traditional values but to push humanity further into the realm of possibility, creating new lines of flight, new modes of becoming. The artist in this context is a harbinger of change, driving culture and society toward new horizons, where the old certainties no longer hold sway.

Sedentary Thought: Accelerationism Viewed Cautiously, Threatening Order and Control

From the perspective of sedentary thought, accelerationism is a dangerous and destabilizing force. The very essence of sedentary thought is the desire for stability, order, and control. Accelerationism, by advocating for the intensification of change, threatens the foundations of social, political, and cultural stability. In this context, art becomes something to be controlled, regulated, and directed to serve the state’s interests.

Art, when accelerated to its extremes, risks collapsing the very structures that support society. This view of accelerationism emphasizes caution and restraint. Art must not be allowed to spiral into chaos, for it would risk unraveling the social fabric. Instead, art should be contained, directed, and regulated to ensure that it does not exceed the boundaries of what is considered acceptable or productive within the context of the state.

In this view, art is an instrument of control, and accelerationism is seen as an existential threat to order and social cohesion. Instead of celebrating change and becoming, art becomes a tool to preserve the status quo, ensuring that the institutions of power, morality, and identity remain intact. For the sedentary thinker, the threat posed by accelerationism is not one of progress but of destruction—a challenge to the very idea of cultural and political stability.

Artistic Implications: Nomad vs. Sedentary Accelerationism

The artistic implications of accelerationism within the nomad and sedentary frameworks are profound. In the nomad context, art becomes a force for radical change and innovation, opening up new creative possibilities and exploring new territories of thought and expression. It accelerates the processes of difference and becoming, pushing the limits of what is possible and creating spaces for new forms of subjectivity and reality.

In contrast, the sedentary context sees accelerationism as a threat to the stability of culture and society. Art, in this view, must adhere to prescribed forms and structures, preserving established values and ideologies. Instead of driving forward into the unknown, art serves as a mechanism for the preservation of the known, ensuring that societal values remain intact.

Art, therefore, becomes a reflection of these opposing philosophies. For the nomad, art is a radical tool of liberation and transformation; for the sedentary, it is a stabilizing force, securing the existing order. Through these opposing lenses, the role of art in society becomes a battleground between creativity and control, freedom and conformity, innovation and tradition.

This exploration of the War Machine, the Line of Flight, and Accelerationism through art captures the fundamental tension between nomad and sedentary thought, emphasizing how art functions as both a force for subversive change and a tool for ideological control.

VI. Towards a New Human, New Earth, New World through Art

Art, in its most profound sense, has the ability to act as a vehicle for transformation—not just of individual lives, but of entire societies, cultures, and worlds. The notion of a "new human," a "new Earth," and a "new world" is a radical departure from the established order. In the context of Deleuzian philosophy, these concepts are not merely utopian ideals but dynamic, evolving processes that art itself can drive. The tension between nomad and sedentary thought is especially evident when considering these transformations. Through the lens of nomad thought, the arts enable a radical reimagining of the human condition, the Earth we inhabit, and the world we construct. In contrast, sedentary thought strives to preserve, control, and contain art’s potential, grounding it in traditional ideals of stability and order.

In this section, we will explore how the "new human," "new Earth," and "new world" are imagined through the lens of art within both nomad and sedentary frameworks. We will see how the arts function differently in these two frameworks, either as instruments of transformation and liberation or as tools for control and conformity.

1. The New Human: Evolving, Adaptable, and Fluid

Nomad Thought: The New Human as an Evolving, Adaptable Figure Embracing Change and Multiplicity

In Deleuzian nomad thought, the "new human" is not a fixed, stable entity but a figure constantly in flux, ever-becoming, and continuously adapting to new contexts. This human is defined not by static traits or preordained goals but by an ongoing process of transformation. The "new human" in nomad thought does not exist as an individual isolated from the world; rather, they are a node in a vast network of relations, multiplicities, and forces. The process of becoming is central to the nomad worldview, and the human is conceived as part of an endless cycle of reconfiguration.

Art plays a critical role in this conception of the human. As a nomad force, art is not concerned with reproducing established norms or reflecting a predefined human ideal. Rather, art is a tool for exploring new forms of existence, new ways of being, and new relationships. Art opens up spaces for new experiences, providing opportunities for the "new human" to explore their potential. The nomad human is a wanderer, always moving beyond the fixed boundaries of identity and society. This movement is not chaotic but rather is directed by the forces of becoming, where creativity and art are the instruments that facilitate this movement.

The "new human" in nomad thought is a complex, layered being—a being who refuses to be defined by conventional categories like gender, race, or nationality. Art, in this context, challenges societal norms, offering new understandings of the self and the world. For example, artists who defy traditional boundaries—whether through gender fluidity, abstract expression, or boundary-breaking installations—are engaging in the nomad process of de-territorialization. These artists disrupt fixed notions of identity and truth, inviting viewers to consider alternative possibilities for what it means to be human.

This process of becoming and transformation is not merely individual but collective. The nomad "new human" is part of a larger, ever-shifting collective of forces, desires, and potentialities. Art, in this sense, is not just a personal experience but a collective reimagination of what it means to exist in the world.

Sedentary Thought: The New Human as an Improved but Stable Individual, Molded by Existing Ideals

In contrast, sedentary thought envisions the "new human" as an idealized figure that is more stable and refined, shaped by existing ideals and moral values. The sedentary "new human" is the product of cultural and social conditioning, molded by established norms, traditions, and institutions. This conception of humanity reflects a belief in progress, but this progress is often viewed as a linear, upward trajectory toward perfection—one in which the human being moves from a crude, primitive state toward a more refined, idealized form.

The "new human" in sedentary thought is often presented as a fixed, normalized individual who adheres to the dictates of social harmony, reason, and moral order. Such a human is governed by concepts like responsibility, duty, and the preservation of established traditions. Art in this context serves to reinforce these ideals, promoting notions of stability, moral uprightness, and social order. For instance, classical art that emphasizes symmetry, harmony, and order exemplifies the sedentary ideal of the "new human." These artworks reinforce the belief that humans must be tamed, civilized, and made to conform to the standards of a well-functioning society.

While there is an appreciation for creativity and progress in sedentary thought, these are seen as processes that occur within the boundaries of tradition and cultural norms. The "new human" in this view may be an improved version of past human forms, but they are not radically different or divergent. Rather, they are individuals who fit comfortably within existing structures and institutions, serving as models for societal improvement.

Thus, while the nomad "new human" is a constantly evolving, ever-becoming figure, the sedentary "new human" is a more stable, defined, and socially integrated person. Art in the sedentary framework supports this ideal by celebrating tradition, order, and stability, fostering a sense of continuity with the past and reinforcing the norms that sustain the status quo.

2. The New Earth: A Dynamic, Borderless Realm or a Controlled, Managed Space?

Nomad Thought: A Reimagined Earth, Free from Fixed Borders and Identities

The "new Earth" in nomad thought is one that transcends the limitations of territorial boundaries, national identities, and geopolitical structures. In this vision, the Earth is not a fixed entity, divided into controlled spaces of nation-states, governments, and territorial claims. Instead, the Earth is seen as an open, interconnected space, without borders or divisions, where all forms of life are part of an interrelated web of becoming.

Art, in this context, acts as a reterritorializing force—a force that redefines the boundaries of identity and space. By creating works that blur the lines between cultures, histories, and environments, artists participate in the process of reimagining the Earth as a fluid, dynamic, and borderless realm. The Earth is not a place to be controlled but a space to be explored, experimented upon, and redefined. For example, contemporary art that explores global migration, environmental destruction, and the fluidity of cultural identity challenges fixed concepts of belonging and territoriality.

In nomad thought, the Earth is seen as an ever-changing, ever-becoming entity—just as the human is. The Earth is a site of continual transformation, where different flows of life, culture, and energy intersect. Art reflects this continual movement, helping to disrupt the rigid frameworks that limit our understanding of the Earth and its possibilities.

This conception of the Earth is not merely idealistic; it is rooted in the practical realities of contemporary life. The increasing movement of people, the globalized economy, and the interconnectedness of human and environmental systems all point toward an Earth that is far from stable or fixed. Art, by embracing this fluidity, contributes to a new understanding of Earth as a space for transformation and emergence, not as a space for control and domination.

Sedentary Thought: A Managed Earth, Shaped by Established, Controlled Forms and Structures

In contrast, sedentary thought views the Earth as a managed, controlled space. The sedentary Earth is an Earth of boundaries—nation-states, borders, and fixed identities. The Earth is understood as a resource to be managed and preserved, with nature divided into categories that can be controlled, governed, and exploited. Art in this context serves to reinforce this order, depicting the Earth as a space to be tamed and understood through rational structures.

The "new Earth" in sedentary thought is not one of radical change, but of improved management. Here, the Earth is seen as a delicate balance that must be controlled and conserved to ensure human progress and survival. Art that reinforces this vision celebrates stability, sustainability, and the management of resources. For instance, landscape paintings or environmental art that glorify the beauty of nature often serve to promote the notion of the Earth as a harmonious space that must be preserved rather than transformed.

This approach to the Earth reflects a worldview that is grounded in the belief that human progress can only occur when nature and society are in harmony. The Earth is seen as a system that needs to be maintained and optimized according to human needs and ideals. Art in this framework supports the notion that humanity's task is to stabilize and protect the Earth, making it a manageable, sustainable space for future generations.

3. The New World: A World of Constant Emergence or One of Stability and Continuity?

Nomad Thought: Art’s Role in Creating a New World of Continual Emergence

The "new world" envisioned by nomad thought is one that is constantly emerging, ever-changing, and never fully stabilized. In this vision, the world is not a finished product, nor is it a place to be conserved. It is a space of ongoing experimentation, of new possibilities constantly coming into being. Art plays a vital role in this conception of the world by creating new realities, questioning existing norms, and introducing new forms of existence.

In the nomad worldview, art is not something that represents reality but something that creates it. Artists act as agents of change, challenging the dominant narratives and offering alternative ways of seeing the world. Through avant-garde movements, abstract forms, and conceptual art, artists generate new visions of reality—ones that go beyond the constraints of traditional thinking. In this sense, art is not just a mirror to the world but a tool for its transformation.

This constantly emerging world is not one of stability or permanence but one of fluidity and uncertainty. The "new world" is a world where values and truths are not fixed but are instead relational, dynamic, and continuously redefined through human and artistic action. Art is the force that destabilizes established systems, encourages new ways of thinking, and promotes the emergence of new social, political, and cultural realities.

Sedentary Thought: Art as Upholding a World of Stability

In contrast, the "new world" imagined by sedentary thought is a world of stability, continuity, and control. Art in this context functions as a stabilizing force, preserving traditional values, institutions, and cultural narratives. Rather than creating new worlds, art in sedentary thought upholds the existing order, reinforcing the idea that the world is already complete and must be maintained.

In this worldview, art serves to reflect and uphold the status quo, presenting the world as a finished, harmonious entity that needs to be conserved rather than reimagined. Art may celebrate the achievements of civilization, glorify history, or reinforce social hierarchies. It is often used as a tool of propaganda or social control, ensuring that the prevailing social order remains intact.

This world is one of fixed meanings and stable structures, where truth, beauty, and value are determined by established institutions and traditions. Art, in this view, has little to do with questioning or challenging the world; rather, it affirms the world as it is.

In summary, the distinction between nomad and sedentary thought reveals deep insights into how art shapes and is shaped by our understanding of humanity, the Earth, and the world we inhabit. Through nomad thought, art offers the potential for radical transformation, reimagination, and continual becoming. It is an essential part of the ongoing process of de-territorialization, creating new humans, new Earths, and new worlds.

In contrast, sedentary thought positions art as a stabilizing force, one that preserves the status quo and upholds traditional values and structures. While both frameworks see art as important, they diverge radically in their roles and purposes. The nomad vision offers a compelling call to embrace change, fluidity, and the transformative power of art, encouraging us to imagine a world of infinite possibilities.

Through the lens of Deleuze, we can see that the "new human," "new Earth," and "new world" are not mere abstractions. They are calls to action, urges to think and create differently. Art, in its most radical sense, can help us move toward these new possibilities, challenging us to reconsider who we are, where we are, and where we are headed. The new human is a wanderer, the new Earth is a place of constant change, and the new world is one of endless emergence—where art leads the way, always opening new paths for us to explore.

VII. Conclusion: A Shocking World of New Possibilities

In the course of exploring the transformative power of art within the frameworks of nomad and sedentary thought, we have journeyed through complex terrains of becoming, difference, repetition, power, and values. These two modes of thought offer radically different visions of human existence, artistic expression, and societal structures. The distinction between nomad and sedentary thought is not merely a matter of intellectual difference but a profound division that shapes how we engage with the world, how we understand beauty, goodness, rights, and power, and how we imagine the future of humanity. In this final section, we will restate these differences, explore the implications for the arts, and conclude with the shocking potential of nomad thought to inspire a radical rethinking of humanity, art, and the very fabric of reality itself.

Summary of Differences: Nomad vs. Sedentary Thought in Art

At the core of our exploration lies a striking contrast between nomad and sedentary thought. nomad thought, as Deleuze presents it, is a force of movement, multiplicity, and becoming. It operates outside the boundaries of fixed identity, embracing fluidity, change, and disruption. Art within nomad thought is not confined to rigid definitions or boundaries; it flows, transforms, and continually deterritorializes, creating new meanings, values, and realities in its wake. The artwork is not merely an object to be interpreted but an event, a force that opens up new worlds, new potentialities, and new lines of flight. Nomad art defies the concept of an end, embracing a future that is always becoming, a process rather than a final destination.

In stark contrast, sedentary thought is anchored in stability, order, and the preservation of identity. It upholds structures of meaning that are often fixed, hierarchical, and tied to social conventions. Art in sedentary thought is bound by traditional forms, grounded in established codes of beauty, goodness, and truth. These artworks affirm the established order, reinforce social norms, and provide a reflection of a stable, well-ordered world. Art is a representation of what is, rather than a catalyst for what could be. It reflects the historical continuity of the present and reaffirms the status quo, where meaning, identity, and truth are already established, fixed, and protected from the chaos of becoming.

The key distinction, then, is that while sedentary art is grounded in permanence and continuity, nomad art is inherently disruptive, experimental, and transitory. It seeks to undermine fixed meanings, challenge established values, and open up new spaces for becoming. This difference between nomad and sedentary art reflects a deeper philosophical divide, one that touches on the very nature of existence itself: is life a journey of becoming, or is it a process of maintaining what already is?

Implications for the Arts: Deleuzian Concepts in Action

Deleuze’s key concepts—the line of flight, rhizome, and accelerationism—have profound implications for the arts, particularly when viewed through the lens of nomad thought. These concepts provide the tools to understand how art can function as a revolutionary force, opening new horizons and reshaping reality itself.

The Line of Flight

The line of flight is one of Deleuze’s most provocative concepts, representing a radical break from the norms and structures that confine thought and existence. A line of flight is a path of escape, a movement away from the rigid, static, and prescribed ways of being. In art, the line of flight is a powerful metaphor for innovation and subversion. Art in the nomad framework is always in motion, always seeking to escape the confines of established structures. It rejects the idea of art as something that simply "reflects" the world, instead treating art as a means of opening up new spaces of freedom and possibility.

This makes art in the nomad sense deeply unsettling. Rather than providing comfort or reinforcing existing systems, it challenges the viewer to engage with new, often uncomfortable, ideas. It confronts the viewer with a world that is always in the process of becoming, a world where meaning is fluid and values are in constant flux. The line of flight in art invites us to consider the possibility of a world where nothing is certain, where identity, meaning, and reality are always shifting, always becoming. This is the power of the nomad art movement—it is not about what we know, but about what we are becoming.

Rhizome

The concept of the rhizome provides another key tool for understanding the radical potential of art within nomad thought. Rhizomes, in Deleuzian terms, are non-hierarchical, decentralized systems that lack a central root or origin. Instead, they spread through multiple, interconnected points, creating complex, unpredictable networks of interaction. In contrast to the tree-like structure of sedentary thought—where knowledge, power, and value flow from a single, central authority—the rhizome represents a new form of organization.

Art that emerges from a rhizomatic approach is fundamentally different from the hierarchical, linear structures of traditional art. It refuses to conform to a single point of origin, a fixed style, or a universal meaning. Instead, it spreads across diverse mediums, styles, and contexts, creating a web of connections and meanings that is ever-expanding and ever-evolving. The rhizome in art encourages multiplicity, diversity, and the breakdown of rigid boundaries. It celebrates the complexity and interconnectedness of all things, and in doing so, it becomes a force of liberation. Art in this context does not seek to reflect the world as it is but to create new ways of thinking, new ways of being, and new ways of experiencing reality.

Accelerationism

Finally, accelerationism introduces a critical dimension to the role of art in nomad thought. Accelerationism proposes that rather than resisting the forces of capitalism, technology, and modernity, we should instead accelerate these forces, pushing them to their extreme limits in order to bring about radical change. In the realm of art, this translates into a demand for art that pushes boundaries, breaks down norms, and challenges conventional wisdom in increasingly radical ways. Rather than retreating into nostalgia or safe representations of the past, art within the accelerationist framework actively engages with the forces of technological change, social upheaval, and cultural revolution.

Art becomes a kind of experimental laboratory, where new forms, new technologies, and new aesthetics are explored at the bleeding edge of societal transformation. The accelerationist artist is not content with reproducing familiar forms but seeks to provoke, disrupt, and drive forward the forces of change. The art of accelerationism is shocking, jarring, and often uncomfortable, as it confronts the viewer with the full force of the future, untempered by the conservative desire for stability or nostalgia. It forces us to confront the unknown, the alien, and the radically new.

Final Thoughts: The Power of Nomad Thought to Revolutionize Humanity, Art, and the Future

The shock of nomad thought lies in its ability to radically transform how we think about ourselves, our art, and our future. In a world increasingly defined by technological acceleration, social fragmentation, and ecological crisis, nomad thought offers a way out of the constraints of sedentary, static thinking. It invites us to embrace the unknown, to break free from the established order, and to embrace the power of becoming, difference, and multiplicity.

The true power of nomad thought, and by extension, nomad art, is that it does not settle for the world as it is. It refuses to accept the limitations imposed by tradition, by power structures, or by conventional ways of thinking. Instead, it looks to the future—not as a continuation of the present, but as a radical break from it. It asks us to consider the possibility of a "new human," one that is not constrained by historical legacies or fixed identities but is instead free to constantly reinvent itself, to engage in endless becoming.

In a similar vein, the new earth and new world envisioned through nomad thought are not mere utopian fantasies, but real possibilities. These are worlds where old boundaries—national, racial, cultural, and ideological—are dissolved in favor of a more fluid, interconnected, and open reality. The new earth is one where human beings are no longer limited by their territorial and identity-based thinking but are free to move, create, and become without the oppressive weight of history or tradition. Art in this new world would be unrecognizable to us today—free from the constraints of time, space, and identity, it would be a living, evolving force that continually shapes and reshapes the world.

At its core, the power of nomad thought is not just about rejecting the past, but about opening up new possibilities for the future. It is about creating a new kind of human experience—one that is dynamic, open, and constantly evolving. It is about creating a world where art is not just a reflection of what is, but a force that creates new realities, new ways of being, and new ways of experiencing the world. In this sense, the power of nomad thought is not merely theoretical—it is a call to action, a call to embrace the chaos of becoming and to build a radically different world through art, through thought, and through human action.

In this shocking, mind-blowing vision, we are invited not to settle for what is, but to reimagine everything—ourselves, our world, and the very nature of existence. The new human, the new earth, and the new world are waiting to be created, not in some distant future, but here and now. Art, in its most radical form, is the means by which we will create that future. The question is no longer whether we will change, but how far we are willing to go in breaking the chains of the past and embracing the infinite possibilities of the future.

This conclusion encapsulates the immense revolutionary potential of nomad thought, offering a vision that challenges the status quo and opens up new creative possibilities for humanity and art alike. It demands that we rethink not just the future, but the very process by which we come to create it.

?