Currently, I am writing out the theory chapter of my PhD thesis, explaining how I am using new materialist theories to analyse working-class students’ emotional experiences of assessments in higher education. I’m using a few theorists to help me with my analysis: Karen Barad and their agential realism, Wittgenstein and his expressivism, and Deleuze and his transcendental empiricism. While all philosophy present challenges to understanding, Deleuze’s philosophy has had me stumped multiple times as his writing is difficult to parse out into straightforward English and the philosophical system itself has some complexity too. So, to help me crystalise my thoughts on his philosophy, I am going to write an application of his notions of difference and repetition to strength sports. I hope the philosophy of sports is ready for this.
Difference and Repetition
Repetition, as Deleuze uses it, does not capture the repetition of the sort that we are familiar with. Generally, we might think of repetition as doing the same thing again and again, replicating identical movements or actions each time. However, Deleuze argues that this is not really how repetition works at all as when we repeat something, it builds on each previous iteration, becoming a foundational part of the action that we take in the present (Deleuze, 1994). That is, the present expresses the past – the fact that we have done an action in the past characterises, and on some level creates, what we do in the present.
This is because what we do in the present is not the same as what we do in the past, it is actually different in a deeper sense (Deleuze, 1994). Difference for Deleuze is the principle which creates the building nature of repetition such that if we do a squat now, it is not just numerically and temporally distinct from previous squats we have done as this is a difference that relies on analogy and comparison. The difference Deleuze is after is a difference that does not require comparison to the identity of other things, a difference that asserts itself without any reference to anything else.
This type of difference captures the immanent character of our experience. Sometimes, with no clear causal reason, our experience can be radically different to what we expected because there is a difference has changed the character of that experience. As an example, this morning I was coming up for my PR squat record, and it felt the weight was moving easily. I am not a strong person, so this was extremely surprising to me as the last time I was approaching this weight, I was on the floor for a good while afterwards. So if this were just an identical repetition of what I had previously done, then it should have felt the same. However, this was an example of repetition in Deleuze’s sense, which was an expression of a difference that hadn’t been present in my previous experiences.
Deleuze on Strength Sports
Now what does this have to do with the experience of doing strength sports? My squat experience this morning is a very positive example of doing strength sports where everything is moving as expected and progress is happening. However, this isn’t always the way it goes. Sometimes, we can get in the gym feeling great, but we can’t lift anywhere near our max no matter how hard we try. Other times, we get in the gym feeling tired and stressed out and manage to have an excellent training session despite these things. What is going on in these situations?
Taking a Deleuzean perspective, it is not just the previous squats that come to inform the squat repetition that we are doing in the moment. It is the entirety of our pasts, conscious or unconscious, and our possible futures which the present moment expresses. All of these things come together to resolve into our experience of the squat we do in the present. As such, the change in time means that the foundations of our present moment have also shifted to give rise to a different experience that can vary wildly and in unpredictable ways from how we think that present moment, the squat, is going to go.
There are, of course, scientific explanations for whether we get a squat or not. Hopefully, across time our muscles are building and we are getting greater access to and control of our central nervous system, allowing us to have more muscle and to call upon more motor units to move the weight we are training with. Also, on days where we do not get the squat, our stress could be quite high, we could have high systemic fatigue, or we could have joint tissue pain from long periods of lifting. For me it is usually that I didn’t find just the right song to PR to.
Takeaways
So given these scientific explanations, what does the Deleuzean approach provide us in terms of lessons for lifting? The notion of repetition includes these scientific factors as well as other wider factors which can impact our lifting, meaning that we need to examine closely how our lifting is going to help us make changes and learn for the next time. It also teaches us to stay motivated – no rep is the same, better, or worse than any previous one, just different. If we can look to our experience and see what difference is shown through failed or successful lifts, we can take a more holistic perspective how we approach training too.
I think the key takeaway here is projecting repetition into the future, which Deleuze borrows from Nietzsche in the form of the Eternal Return. We can recognise that these differences will continue changing, characterising our future lifts. However, this difference builds on each and every rep we do and, at the end of the day, that’s how gainz are made.
References
Deleuze, G. (1994) Difference and repetition. Translated by P. Patton. New York: Columbia University Press.