Deleuze's and Adorno's Nietzsche: Nietzsche as the philosopher of the unconscious and as inconsistent nonidentity, dialectical thinker

Deleuze and Adorno are central figures in the currents of thought of poststructuralism and of Critical Theory respectively. The influence of Nietzsche in the thought of the former is open and has never been disputed, although, strangely, it has not been sufficiently investigated yet. The influence of Nietzsche in the thought of the latter, however, is much less recognised.
The thesis explores the influence of Nietzsche in these thinkers. In particular, it explores Nietzsche’s appropriation by poststructuralism, as represented by Deleuze, with particular emphasis on Peter Dews’ contention that the poststructuralist critique of identity appropriates the irrationalistic side of Nietzsche’s critique of identity. Further, the thesis explores Nietzsche’s appropriation by Critical Theory, as represented by Adorno, with particular emphasis to our hypothesis, inspired by Peter Dews, Karin Bauer and Gillian Rose, that there is also a rationalistic side in Nietzsche’s critique of identity which is appropriated and developed by Critical Theory and Adorno, as well as investigates the transformation by Adorno of Nietzsche’s critique of rationality into a critique of domination. Finally, regarding Nietzsche’s philosophy, the thesis examines the ‘paradox of Nietzsche’, which consists in the existence of two contradictory claims about Nietzsche: by Deleuze of Nietzsche being a fierce critic of dialectics, and by theorists like Rose and Bauer of Nietzsche being the originator of Adorno’s negative dialectics.
Such a research project is important as an intervention in Nietzsche scholarship because it advances a reading of Nietzsche as an inconsistent nonidentity, dialectical in the Adornean sense thinker, never attempted before; it is important as an intervention in Deleuze scholarship because it challenges the poststructuralist reading of Nietzsche, especially its critique of dialectics; it is important as an intervention in Adorno scholarship because it highlights the rarely mentioned and never explored origin of Adorno’s negative dialectics in Nietzsche’s thought.