Reading of Deleuze & Guattari "Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia" chapter 1 of part 1

Hello!!! 
It is my first time writing here and I wanted to get into habit of doing so by having a job to do and that job is to write and explain weird books I come across (as non-weird ones dont need explainations..most of the time)
btw this is my take on it, I may miss crucial context and knowledge but...
Lets begin!

First chapter of this work is titled: "The Desiring-Machines" and the first part is "The Desiring-Production"

First thing we learn is that "machines" are EVERYWHERE, some working flawlessly and other ones "fit and start" 
What are machines? We are not told yet but the third sentence is quite revealing in what are we dealing with: "What a mistake to have ever said the id" 
Now we should instantly connect the topic to Freud (title obviously points to psychoanalysis too duh unless you thought there was something wrong with which we should fight with in the character of King Oedipus from Sophocles play), what exactly is 'id"? 
In Freudian theory of human conciousness Id is source of energy, animalistic desire and powers that take hold of us when we let ourselves go and spiral down led by burst of emotions and lack of self-control (other ones are Superego which is idealized societal standard of what and how we should be and also there is Ego kind of in the middle that tries to negotiate between the two). 

So why is saying  "the id" a mistake? One might notice the emphasis on "the" which is a definite article, what is a role of a definite article? There are a few but one of them is making abstract terms a proper object of intellectual discourse (think "good" and "the good"/"good in-itself", one is just something good and other is a question over what is "goodness" overall ripped out of specific examples or contexts)

So...what was the mistake Freud made? It was to make "Id" something on par of superego or ego, something to discuss, something that jsut makes an individual..he made Id or "desire" explicitly HUMAN. Again next sentence bears a key to answering what is wrong with this assumption...(yes, sadly we need to departure from the main question ,that is what tf are "machines", to even deeper abyss beacuse Deleuze and Guattari write like that and I odnt want to jump around)

"Everywhere it is machines—real ones, not figurative ones: machines driving other machines, machines being driven by other machines, with all the necessary couplings and connections."

I think this sentence is important beacuse it reveals to us that...everything, literally everything is connected (atleast every machine) and its REAL, its not a metaphor!! "Machines" exist as..something? and finally we get to see an example of one (still not knowing what constitutes a machine) 

"The breast is a machine that produces milk, and the mouth i machine coupled to it."

erm, wtf?? is this what all this analysis is about???
kind of?

There is one other example with "organ-machine" and "energy-machine" but I think its a mirror of the one I wrote above just "abstracted" just as math is abstraction of a pattern from the physical world (and then conceptual work on this what we've got)

So there is a producer..and there is something coupled to it (or "plugged" as in the example with organs and energies) (still not completely sure of the deeper meaning but thats just the first paragraph, obviously not much is going to get explained). It again points out to the topic of psychoanalysis, especially analysis of young children (think work of Melanie Klein).
So its likely we can expect some critique of earlier psychoanalytic models of child psychological development later on in the work.

Then there is a quick mention of an anxorexic who is unsure what function does the "machine" that being his mouth is supposed to take on (eaitng, speaking, breathing etc.), Im not sure how close is psychoanalytic understanding of anorexia to the modern psychology but it doesnt seem to matter, what is important is that "machines" seem to have "functions" what are "functions" what a great question! (We dont know yet!!!)

But there is a little snippet after it "Hence we are all handymen: each with his little machines." implication of this sentence is that we have some freedom, some ability ot choose, change, modify functions of our machines, we are not and are not supposed to be static or better "mono-moded"

And now we meet one of the main characters: Judge Schreber (of whom authors accurately say that he has, quote "sunbeams in his ass")..who is that????

Well, Judge Schreber was early 20th century german judge (working in parliament) who suffered from a mental breakdown, spent months in psychiatric institutions but then he got his freedom back, how? He proved his sanity (kind of) in the court.

Its a very interesting case beacuse guy wasnt cured at all, he lived in such crazy world where God connects people through threads form the sky, talks to him directly, women-birds sit on his shoulders and talk, Schreber himself is fighting with jewish conspiracy to take over the world and needs ot become a women to birth next generation of heroes to fight for the world while also having randomly disappearing organs and stuff...he saw it, he belived it and he authored a very interesting autobiography analyzed later by Freud "Memoirs of my mental ilness"

Freud as he is, reduced it to family, fear of the almighty father the most...but there is almost no mention of father in the memoirs? Except that Schreber seemed to be on rather good terms with him and most importantly...THERE IS WHOLE WORLD IN HIS HEAD, Deleuze noticed that, that silly Freudian complexes have nothing to say of this, they just treat it as random stuff without importance (except when it proves the theory)

"Judge Schreber feels something, produces something, and is capable of explaining the process theoretically. Something is produced: the effects of a machine, not mere metaphors."

Thats how this paragraph ends...with assertion to not dismiss Schreber and his interesting beliefs, rather to look at them closely as a system, produced..by another system..(and in relation to many others) they all perpetuate eachother in flux




What we know? Not much for now, world is in constant, interconnected, creative flux...and it has to do something with psychoanalysis, desire (which are not entriely human) and delusions

I only analyzed one paragraph but I hope I'll have more time tomarrow!!! bye bye!!!