After the Bergson woman had left the cafe, I noticed she had left an index card behind on which was written the following:

I have always understood Deleuze’s philosophy as one of burglary and
(mis) appropriation. The ‘filtration’ of his philosophy through the vitality of
one’s own desire is in fact its realisation. Being true to Deleuze is to
practice rather than interpret him; or, to interpret him correctly is to pass
beyond interpretation. How few philosophers do we take at their word? Such credulity is often the most radical form of subversion.

Was this aimed at myself? It was difficult to imagine otherwise. Next time I saw her she was passing an ice cream vendor. 'Can i interest you in some strawberry ice cream' the vendor asked; 'you can interest me, sure, but I won't be buying any'. She found this retort uproariously funny - this kind of 'humour' is undoubtedly one of her bad points.

'So what was with the index card?'

She explained that the costive, hermetic character of contemporary academic work stems partly from a kind of compartmentalisation, whereby thinking has dwindled to a professional specialism or skill rather than injunction to change your mode of life.

I rolled my eyes

'Time and again, she opined, the most 'sophisticated' cultural or philosophical theory fails to make one iota of difference to how these people experience the world or relate to others. Out of work they desire only those Objects of designated Consensual Enjoyment - the family, the shopping mall, the trashy magazine and TV, but they enjoy them with that 'ironic-pretence of guilt' enjoyment which is the very signature of their entire being-in-the world and the glue of their collective solidarity.'