Becoming-animal in Shaffer’s Equus Ashley Woodward University of Dundee Abstract This paper mounts a philosophical defence of Peter Shaffer’s 1973 play Equus by interpreting it from three perspectives: that of Freud, Jung, and Deleuze and Guattari. The latter’s concept of becoming-animal is offered as a leading perspective which reveals the deep philosophical significance of the drama, belying the claims of those critics who have dismissed it as bogus or banal. This interpretation also allows Equus to be seen as an exemplary illustration of what Deleuze and Guattari mean by their intriguing concept of becoming-animal, and throws fresh light on this fascinating but difficult notion. Keywords: Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, Peter Shaffer, Equus, becoming-animal, philosophy of theatre, modern drama Introduction: Three Animals [A]ll genuinely creative writings are the product of more than a single motive and more than a single impulse in the poet’s mind, and are open to more than a single interpretation. (Freud 1953a: 266) This paper aims to redress a persistent injustice of interpretation. Peter Shaffer’s 1973 drama Equus has enjoyed tremendous theatrical success, but it has also provoked much stark criticism. Brooke Allen, to cite just one example, claims that it is ‘one of the most pretentious plays ever written’ (2008: 38). As Una Chaudhuri notes, critics have tended to acknowledge that its theatrical devices have worked, but have attacked the intellectual substance of the play ([1984] 1993: 287, 288). 1 This Deleuze Studies 9.2 (2015): 231–256 DOI: 10.3366/dls.2015.0184 © Edinburgh University Press www.euppublishing.com/journal/dls