.              -                                                     .                                                         .

.                    -                           .                   -    +                                            .

                                                      .   `                                       .           

                                                                                                                                                              .

                       .                                     -                                            .                          .

sometimes I think that persistence of this stubbornly clean/coherent, and almost dogmatically-biased language applied to everything out in the 'thinking' sectors - narrative applications whose proponents might readily admit the failure/paradox of their own intentions - is the very problem that's folding new phenomena 'backwards' towards an appearance of assemblage and pastiche

                                                                                                       .

                                                                                            .                                             -            '                         .

                                                                                                    .                     *                                .

                                                                                                                                           .                  *              .

    like, this pervasive 'spot-the-reference' game - of defining the now through a 'correct' and reductive use of jargon and terms - fading artifacts of previous attempts at (unsuccessfully) explaining complex phenomena - is, by the very fucking coordinates and relationship of that approach's position within the generative signal's circle of influence...  not only posteriorally-located but posteriorizing...                                                                                                       .                        ,                                  '

                                                                                                                                         .                           .             `

it's not just transmuting the present into History - which would happen for any original emanation over time - but pushing it even further backwards... forcing it into the sterile museums of history's countless failures, rather than allowing it to become its own creative/interesting failure...    (failure is key here... it's the illusion of success/perfection that beholdens people to dead languages)

                                                                                                                                                                                               .

  .

                         '

said approach collapses living mutations to an irrelevant 'sum of their parts' (which, through the failure of language, are unfailingly mis-named, mis-applied)

                                          .                 o

                                                                 .                              `          .    

                           .                                           .           *                                 .

                                                             .                                                     .

it's kinda like the way (to probably - and hopefully - misuse a metaphor I'll make with quantum theory) the 'observer' collapses and shapes/'locates' undefined/amorphous quanta by the dictates/metric of his own subjectivity

                                                                                      .                                   .             *

                                                                                                                  .                       .

                                                                                                         .                         .                                        .

                                                                                                    .                                         -

I mean, it's a compulsively fun and addictive game to play, but it's not elucidating the whole picture.  I wouldn't say life is 'messier' than what it describes... but it's deeper and more complex?  

                                                                                                                                               .        .

                                                                                                                                                                              .

                                                                                                                                             .

 'discourse' should almost be a creative act in itself, possessed by, and realizing, the same force of its object's agency                    .

                                                                                                                                                                                .

(the irony/problem of this post is duly noted...   but maybe sometimes you have to partially exploit the confirmation bias inherent to language to reprogram it?   a part of the creative aspect of discourse...    the refutation/problematization of itself?)