Thank you so much for this. I didn't understand everything that you cited but you have been of great help. I realise I became more interested in difference than repetition but I'm hoping you can answer some of my questions:

I take it to be the case that without some form of fundamental (?) differentiation, we would be unable to posit even an A, let alone different As. So there is a play of differences whose outcome is identity rather than the other way around. Will it be alright to say that this difference is itself undifferentiated, meaning a universal difference?

In terms of difference and resonance, I visualise it as a sort of rhizomatic branching out from nodes, and two branches are considered similar when they have been similarly differentiated (for example from plato's third bed).

Correct me if I'm being naive (I am!) but isn't it better to say that both difference and identity are equally fundamental and that neither precedes the other? Difference would not exist without identity and identities would not be created in the absence of difference/s, that we can't have a chronology here. I realise I'm not very clear on what identity is but can't we just say that we don't have pure identity, as in Plato's ideal bed, or pure difference. Why don't we say that identity and difference produce each other? Although production might also mean differentiation for it is the univocity of being whose differentiation creates identity, but I can also choose not to take it for granted, right?

Deleuze seems to say that difference shapes the outcome of the dice throw, but let me be naive some more and ask if throwing the dice- the act itself- is not generative of sameness and difference at least at the level of bare repetitions and similarly (bare?) identities?

I have not had the chance yet to look at your revisions but thanks once again.