In their critique of Sigmund Freud's (psycho)analysis of the Wolf-Man in A Thousand Plateaus, philosopher Gilles Deleuze and psychoanalyst Félix Guattari take on the methodology and ideology of psychoanalysis, which they deem ‘a mixed semiotic: a despotic regime of significance and interpretation’ (Deleuze and Guattari 1987: 125), and so they take on much of the regime of Modernism itself. For Deleuze and Guattari, Freud misreads the Wolf-Man's narrative, imposing nominalist, patriarchal presuppositions on the narrative's multiplicity, reducing an assemblage to the name of the Father, or the name of the Wolf-Man, in the crafting of a coherent, unified subconscious. Deleuze and Guattari replace the constrictive unity of psychoanalysis with its emphasis on the subconscious with the multiplicity of schizoanalysis and its emphasis on the unconscious. Freud's misreading confuses the two, the unified subconscious with an unconscious as assemblage that is ‘fundamentally a crowd’ (29), an analysis of Freud that parallels Deleuze's critique of Heidegger's Sein. In their analysis Deleuze and Guattari are careful to distinguish between, in its Bergsonian echo, the simple multiplicity of space, ‘numerical or extended multiplicities’, and that of the assemblage with its ‘qualitative’ multiplicities (33). They will use a variety of terms to distinguish between a multiplicity which is a sequence or series, to which one can always add another entity, an N+1, say, and ‘rhizomatic multiplicities’ or ‘molecular, intensive [as opposed to extensive] multiplicities’ which are non-totalizable. Within that assemblage, that crowd, the Wolf-Man, as pack, as qualitative multiplicity and molecular process rather than molar entity, is apprehensible as it ‘approaches or moves away from zero’: