/lit/ - Literature

>>20410455
The light-color-pigment relation is described as pure mystification by Physics, a Catholic invention, and for good reason. It is irrelevant if light is coherent and pigment is not or vice versa, it is just the perpetuation of the definitional mystification, but as soon as color itself is simply dismissed, by Cartesian, Cynic, Gnostic, etc. doubt, the whole Dialectic reveals itself to be pure obscurantism. On one hand, the actuality of color does absolutely engender the Dialectic of pigment and light, allegedly through no means other than the Subjective gap separating them, both of them being nothing but color when merely perceived, neither of them being imposed as the true one by an Other. On the other hand, the dismissal of color itself is Philosophical taboo and reveals that that which is enforced, and absolutely bears the mark of the hidden Other, is the Dialectic itself. I recall seeing a cartoon wherein one fetus asked another if it believed in their mother, the other replying that it does not because neither of them can see her. Inverting the topology, Yaldabaoth hides inside his own total prolapse, the verse of the actual and the obverse of the Demiurgic truly precluding a classic Other, that is beyond, or above, or in between them, this being one half of the perversity hidden inside the argument according to which “there is no big Other”, the other half being that the big non-Other, so to speak, hides in plain sight, implicitly exempt from the analytic cornucopia, a true “leftunder”, forceps forgotten inside the patient. The properly Hegelian conclusion would exorcise the non-Other inasmuch as it exorcises the Other, however, this is totally absent from the aforementioned argument. Properly Hegelian non-Other and Other being verse and obverse of an infernal sphere. That is to say, the gap is actually the contiguity between them. The Subjects are free to know and to wallow in the meandering of externality, both as blood through a hollow fang and excrement through a colon, but when this dubious freedom is called into question the pretense is dropped and the Subjects are forcefully disclosed to themselves. The Blair Witch Project beguiles one with such a “Hegelian” gap, once one accepts that the witch is never shown because there is no witch, there is almost nothing that it - the witch, the question, the film - cannot do. Just as all that the found footage technique adds to classic film structure is invisible because it purports itself as an effacement. In classic film, characters are often privy to something that the viewer is not and vice versa. In found footage, at least one character and at least one viewer are contiguous, the film itself becoming nothing but the fourth wall, the footage being filmed from a vantage point as Subjective as the one from which it is viewed, character and viewer being verse and obverse of the fourth wall. In classic film, the fourth wall is a concession made to the other three.

>>20410459
What happens to the other three in found footage? The Blair Witch Project unearths the Copernican perversity according to which there are no privileged vantage points by being its most earnest depiction: by taking it to its only Logical conclusion, Acosmism, if Earth is not a privileged vantage point then any and all Empirical observations from Earth are irrelevant, the cast wandering in circles in the incomprehensible “heliocentric” Acosmos, just as the film drifts in front of the viewer as an apparition of the “geocentric” Acosmos"; and by inverting the totalization embedding the fourth wall into the other three, the wilderness is the one-way mirror beyond which the witch lurks, embedding the other three walls into the fourth, not only putting the witch in the room with the viewer but effectively turning him into the witch by the magic trick of making a square circle. The intra-Divine determination of square and circle is more, not less, absurd than the potential of a square circle in that the God-square or God-circle relation is a greater contradiction than the square-circle one: any two of the parts constituting the definition of square or circle are already in a relation as, if not more, absurd than that between the parts of a potential square circle in that each part’s relation to God is analogous to that of square or circle to God, and each part’s relation to the parts with which it constitutes the definition of square or circle is as absurd as the absurd relation between square and circle in the potential square and circle coincidence. There are nightmares whose horror is precisely a lack thereof, depraved acts, sights, words, etc. that seem innocuous in the dream. The film does not claim that squares and circles are themselves the Subjects’ waking nightmares, and God’s nightmares first and foremost, the classic “Hegelian” obscurantism, rather, that squares and circles are instantiations of Divine Law, criminal instantiations of the square circle Law: neither Law as Universalized crime, nor squares and circles as democratically emerging from the bottom-up, but the properly Hegelian revelation that, just as the single surface of the sphere, of the contiguity, encloses everything in its Other inside, its outside is also fatally oriented around the non-Other side of the same single surface. The square circle ever-excreting aborted squares and circles. The cast leaves human habitation behind only to die in the house in the middle of nowhere, the freedom of the gap being precisely the omnidetermination of the Demiurgic Law, the Subjects’ apparent free divergence therefrom is only a guise for their criminal convergence therein.

>>20410464
Incidentally, and apropos of bilateral bewitching, perhaps the witch is the house, the home, itself and the film is an ontogenetic documentary: the cast being the children about to be defecated into the dark continent of family, Heather seeing Mike in the final scene as the parent and child see each other, the witch laughing with the voices of invisible children because children can only be actual as prostheses for adult enjoyment; a dissection of the sleight of hand of reproduction, looking into the pitch black plane of contiguity itself, into the “miracle” of conception. Regardless, the contiguity being irresistible so much so that the “Hegelian” insight is perhaps Hegelian after all, there is no sphere precisely because the writhing of contiguity indefinitely turns it inside-out, indefinitely fragmenting it toward the contiguity itself dispensing itself to Other and non-Other alike, making them intra-contiguous as well. Inverting the topology, indeed, perhaps the Subjects recoiling from the innocuously horrible nightmare signals that their waking life is the dream in which fantastic experience contradicts their actual condition, disclosed to them in the nightmare, of being totally depraved. In this sense, the film also unearths the conclusion of the Copernican perversity, the vampiric “quantum” maneuver. The privilege of the vantage point of the Earth is not abolished, merely stolen and distributed toward the production of the Cosmos, Phenomenal bodies thereby having their absolute inanity exposed by wearing Earth’s privilege, rightly appearing that much more monstrous. Matter has only come to life, per the “quantum” maneuver, inasmuch as it has sucked the Subjects dry. All analyses of the film miss the forest for the trees, their common denominator of inquiry into why Phenomena are frightening misses the simple point that Phenomena are frightening in and of themselves, one being bewitched into ignoring this and projecting his fear into the impotent fantasy of there being no witch, which only subtracts one’s Subjectivity in real time. This is the film’s most exquisite horror: celluloid, canvas, pixels unduly wearing Subjectivity. A true topology of violation and, apropos of “quantum” maneuvers, that perception affects its object, perhaps a revelation that Heather’s question is only a mystery for the viewer, not for her. In the scene wherein the cast runs out of their tent in, and into, the dead of night, Heather’s question might beguile the viewer into thinking that it constitutes a cinematic device akin to the “Hegelian” gap, however, perhaps that which she inquires about is precisely the viewer’s ignorance, the viewer facing the wall as she is being killed.

>>20410470
The fourth wall is a death mask, Heather being the convex side and the viewer the concave, “Hegel” would claim that there is no face, living or dead, on either side because the Subjects are themselves gaps, just as the fourth wall is, however, I claim that it is the fatal contiguity of the mask that precludes the Subjects, everything facing its convexity being just as covered thereby as whatever is behind its concavity. The idea that perception affects its object is an all but explicit disclosure of the Ontological sodomy whereby the Subjects are disclosed to themselves, Heather and viewer being byproducts of the contiguity of The Blair Witch Project, patients forgotten outside the forceps. Vampirism is another beguiling “Hegelian” gap, perhaps best exorcised by analyzing vampiric reproduction: the vampire is not the acknowledged gap revealing the supposedly unacknowledged gap in the Subject, but one half of the abortive reproduction of the Ontological sodomy, Yaldabaoth imbuing the Subjects with his violation by his violation, in his image, to deprive them even of their victimhood, just as the vampire turns the victim into another vampire. This, rather than the vulgar thermodynamic predation, constitutes the prominent Evil, the Evil good. The Subjects perversely becoming vacuous parasites themselves, implicitly attached to the inside-out womb, or colon, the host bloating a locally anesthetized reverse vampire with lethal substance. This is why the film’s last scene is so disturbing. Mike is inside a basement, inside a derelict house, in the wilderness, in the dead of night, facing the wall; is this not the primal nightmare of the appearance and whereabouts of the supposed witch? Mike is no longer a victim, he is grafted onto the vampiric suction, he becomes the witch. Semiotically, the scene is an explosive decompression into the Demiurgic Cosmos, the wall which the viewer likewise faces, the irresistible vampiric reproduction. That the scene is foreshadowed at the beginning of the film is exquisitely Evil, the viewer facing the wall again by making this banal connection, oblivious to the machinations of the film; afflicted by a gap, indeed. Perhaps the Catholic was right all along and the pitch black of space is the pupil of Yaldabaoth: the square circle being created by an absolutely insane voluntarism which not so much projects Creation from Divine eyes but, in an apotheosis of Catholicism, sucks the Material aspect of Creation into its perceptive heuristic, the pupil; “in his image”. The providential mist of Subjectivity rises from the sea of gore, verse and obverse of the gap of contiguity, the Subjects’ freedom being as dubious as that of aborted body parts, coveted for their biological incontinence. Schizophrenia is a vector for depurating this fundamental schizocosmia, the gap in the two halves of the forceps enables the pivot to run through and assemble them into pure contiguity.

>>20410476
The Subjects are disclosed to themselves as leftovers spanning the parameters of this hidden forceps, as cryptic abortions. Perhaps an anatomy of the abortion, and a Christological autopsy, can be inferred from the pieces of Strangelove from Stanley Kubrick’s Dr. Strangelove, Veronica from Ingmar Bergman’s Hour of the Wolf, and György from Béla Tarr’s Werckmeister Harmonies. Dr. Strangelove unearths the other conception. Apocryphally, the film is pure paganism. It begins with an exegesis of the sexes. The cut separating the prostrated secretary and the plane is usually given a vulgar Freudian meaning, that of war being caused by the absence of women. Perhaps it is the women that are caused by an absence of war. Certain feminists claim that parthenogenesis is implicit, and that the feminine has been hijacked by the masculine. Curiously, the conclusion of said claim is itself feminine, pointing at its only omitted object, and doubly feminine at that, one that almost all feminists miss, just as the secretary is shown to be prostrated in, or by, her own comfort in the middle of catastrophe. A conclusion whereby the feminists have unwittingly become the ultimate Yin to the Yang they claim ultimately parasitic: that of reproduction itself being anything but implicitly sexed. Perhaps it is not women and their asexual reproduction that are primordial, but womAn alone, and it is not the man who hijacks this idyllic state of affairs for his own ends, but reproduction itself which hijacks the woman. The vulgar sexing of reproduction would entail the reproductive end being rather feminine and the ends of all things not reproductive being rather masculine, however, a single-sexed reproduction would entail the former end as absolutely masculine and the latter ends as relatively masculine, colloquially feminine. The feminist claim that women figuratively make the sun rise is a most dubious honor. Perhaps Freud’s claim that the child is the woman’s phallus is his only intellectually DIGNIFIED one: the superfluity of reproduction turning the implicit woman into a relation to the masculine, the ever-receding children, of either actual sex, being the impossible masculine which makes all actual women into secondary failures, which hijacks them to no end. Actual men occupying the “esoteric” position which many feminists claim is occupied by actual women, that of the negative, virtual, ghostly, interstitial, etc.; there being no paradox, contradiction, or Dialectic between the aforementioned impossible masculine, the injunction of reproduction inserting itself into the woman, and the masculinity of actual men. Perhaps the misogynist claim that the common denominator, and the only proper definition, of women is their desire to be men, Materially, Socially, and especially Philosophically, is the foundation of feminism itself.

>>20410486
War has always been colloquially castrated for this reason, the planes in Dr. Strangelove explicitly being precluded from destroying their targets by the reproductive insatiability of Yaldabaoth, which even intra-reproduces, so to speak: the military monopoly of superpowers, far from threatening to destroy the world, engenders the world inside the world, the world as a bilateral ectopic pregnancy. This is the abjection of the woman: the unassailable fantasy of the plane as both that which cannot be reached, in and of reproduction, and that which will never fatally deliver her therefrom. The film ends with what is revealed to be an evental theory. The plot revolves around a plane that is hijacked, first remotely, then hijacked by itself. Figuratively, there are two ways in which there are two planes: the plane is split between the initial state, a blip on the cryptic map, and the hijacked state, then further split between the initial hijacking and the subsequent intra-hijacking, so to speak. The plane contains two nuclear bombs which are, of course, forbidden from destroying their targets, as integral to an almost literally architectural structure. However, the detonation of the first “causes” the detonation of the second, just as mysteriously as the collapse of the second tower resembles the collapse of the first. The “towers” being inside the planes all along, an all but explicit rebuke of Marxist evental theory, which claims that an, unsurprisingly crypto-oriental, Phenomenal symmetry is responsible for all events. Indeed, if anything can be said about THE event, 9/11, it is that the harmony of 1s and 0s is a masquerade for the abomination of 2 and 0. Conversely, some properly conspiratorial trifles: in the film, four planes are reported to have been destroyed prior to the others being recalled, one of which is later revealed to have only been damaged; a reference to the uncanny numerological obsession spanning Jesus’ wounds and extremities. Also, the four hijackings and the four Gospels, Gnosis concluding with the intra-hijacking, John. Regardless, why did the first bomb detonate at all? The ridiculous blueprint of “the contingency of necessity and the necessity of contingency” is pure obscurantism, a “gap” arduously opened to hide Demiurgic voluntarism, Occasionalism, which is not so much on either side of the “gap”, but hidden under it, under pure fabrication. Surely, all bombs would be duds in an Occasional, Demiurgic, world. Conversely, all duds can therein be armed to an absolutely fatal degree, unlike tepid Causal bombs. Conversely, can they be turned back into duds? Yes, but no. “If at all possible”, could all planes be recalled? Obviously not. Occasions absolutely superseding each other would Dialectically turn the incontinence into continence, each “old” occasion being perfectly abstained from with each “new” occasion.

>>20410494
Yaldabaoth only adds, never subtracts: not only is there no implicit state of affairs against which Occasional control is exerted, but exception constitutes its own absolute Occasion; there are only contiguous states of antinomy, all absolute Occasions, an ever-lengthening Möbius strip, the twist being Yaldabaoth himself. From the initial order that armed the planes to the detonation, Yaldabaoth was (all) in (on) every Occasion. Nevertheless, how did the Gnostic advent detonate? Why does the film put the diegetic interruption of Strangelove’s explanation about the doomsday device in the aural foreground? Perhaps it is the President, rather than Strangelove, who provides the fatal denouement. Does the fact of the advent not require a concession to Causality? Yes, but no. To briefly demystify Occasionalism: if thermodynamics or Différence, the Material and Ideal names of quantity, that which Causality is said to span, could reach the mystical “equilibrium”, does it not Logically follow that there should be nothing but “equilibrium”? It is especially absurd when taking the Materialist for his word, the “big bang” itself introduces the potential for a mirror event that absolutely compresses the world into the final “equilibrium”, and “supra-Temporally” at that, making the question of why it has not already occurred that much more pressing. An event that the Materialist, however, claims will never occur, and prophetically at that; utter nonsense. A properly thermodynamic or Différent world can only exist suspended between three absurdities: thermodynamic or Différent means can not make it, cannot sustain it, and cannot end it. Rather, quantity can only exist as its masquerade: since the Occasions neither change nor end, indefinite, and indefinitely false, thermodynamics or Différence is thereby engendered. Speculation on the quality of quantity is another “gap”, fabricated to obscure the fact that quantity is nothing but quality, that it does not exist. “This generation shall not pass” because generation does not exist. The evental 2 and 0 mirrors the sexual 2 and 0, both stuck in an impasse, itself mapping onto 2 and 0. Perhaps the taboo of the mirror of the “big bang” is relevant, for revealing Materialism as barbarism, of course, but also for insight into the Gnostic advent. It is taboo not because it does not happen, despite its Logical necessity, but because it does, despite its Logical absurdity.

>>20410498
The phrase “immaculate conception” implies as much, the conception must be immaculate from nothing but the conception itself, the Demiurgic sodomy. Yet another example of the Catholic being the only one guilty of everything that accuses the Gnostic of, needless to say. Compare the Catholic logorrhea sullying the subject to the immaculate insight of the Gnostic. Just as the fatal plane’s radio is destroyed, the advent seemingly using individual Occasions to epiphenomenally intervene, it seemingly destroys Strangelove’s radio, the Demiurgic phallus, just as the detonation occurs, casting doubt on its own means. What is ostensibly kept from the Subject’s eyes so that it might not fall prey to Yaldabaoth’s is only Philosophically invisible because it is a true advent, being nothing but immanent, hence Strangelove’s miraculous healing and its proximity to the detonation. This is how pagan Theology is sanctioned by the Christological advent, not as aborted pieces glued into an abominable whole, Catholicism, but as a destruction of the pretense thereto. Pythagoras’ Golden Verses begin by praising Demiurgic Law, ©overt affirmation of Yaldabaoth all but defines Buddhism, Platonism, Zoroastrianism, etc. Their Gnostic affinity and opposition to vulgar Christianity is only a “retrospective” one. It is only after Strangelove rose from his chair as the emaciated Buddha casting off his subsequent fat that pagan Theology was granted its fatality. Veronica unearths the other birth. Apocryphally, the film is pure Christianity, a pure blueprint of the mortal Gnostic-Catholic enmity. The question of Veronica’s identity is obscured by the useless question of what went wrong between Johan and Alma. Why were North Koreans crying when Kim Jong-il died? Contrary to nonsense about performance or illness, their tears are the Catholic’s white whale, the purest instantiation of love: love as a symptom of an abomination and abomination as a symptom of love. Divine love is a blank check that Yaldabaoth writes himself, the means of indefinite abomination. Love should be rejected not because Yahweh is Yaldabaoth and his ostensibly true love is false, but precisely because Yaldabaoth is Yahweh and his ostensibly false love is true. Evil is the presence of good. Moreover, evil only gains its capital E when being “good”. Jesus Christ is vital for Yaldabaoth: the abomination of his execution and the abomination of its alleged meaning, that of the Atonement, “deliver” Yaldabaoth from the banality of mere evil; the capital E suspended in their terminal mutual aggravation. In this sense, nothing went wrong between Johan and Alma; a perfect love story. Rather, who is Veronica? This is where the error is. Veronica and Alma are never in the same scene, the painting of Veronica is never shown, a mirror reflecting Alma faces the camera while she is looking at the painting; even a vulgar analysis implies that Veronica and Alma are one and the same.

>>20410503
Verse and obverse of Johan’s abortion. However, the vanishing point of Veronica does not hide behind the abundance of Alma, quite the contrary, the otherwise obvious identity of the latter is hidden in the crypt of the former. The dimension between them is the very “secret knowledge” ascribed to the Gnostic by the Catholic . Walking two miles, Catholicism is so original that it even invented its plagiarism, Veronica and Alma being Catholicism and its puppet of vulgar Gnosticism, respectively. Vulgar Christianity is defined by “mystical” witticisms, “schizo” turns of phrase, “foreboding” ambiguity, etc.; all by design. Catholicism forbids the Catholic from fathoming Catholic, rather than Gnostic, depths. For example, the most tepid “moral” interpretation of Matthew 25:31-46 is a pitfall into the most abhorrent crypt: shape-shifting and/or using people as props, the preemptive commodification of charity, eschatological questions foretold only to be answered, making the foretelling absurd, most dead children condemned to everlasting fire since they had no means to help anyone, despite seeing them. One gives himself to Veronica by taking Alma’s hand. The truly Gnostic interpretation must look in the only place exempt from inquiry, into the passage itself, and see this true identity beyond its pathetic appearance, as the passage itself ultimately commands. Or John 9:3: affirmation of the most bestial consequentialism by the most libertarian actor. Or Matthew 6:14-15: forgiveness itself upends the allegedly unconditional nature of Divine forgiveness, thus becoming Demiurgic blackmail, and, curiously, a Universal coin in which God and man pay each other, the true face of the world government, of contiguity, which Christians allegedly oppose. Catholicism revolves around Veronica. She is the Christian, as in Catholic, Subject, against which the Christological advent operates. The Veronica theory of value: Marxism, a Catholic theory, is warped around the vanishing point of the fact that that which value pertains to, human life, is itself absolutely worthless, such that the only value of the theory is that of a guise, a fabricated “gap”, an Alma, who has only “changed the world” inasmuch as it has been a funnel to the abjection of Veronica. History itself proudly admits it. Regardless, the film begins with a Marxist event, the initial darkness is dispelled by Alma approaching the camera, and ends with what is the ostensible mirror of said event. The dimension between them is another depiction of the impasse between 2 and 0. The Marxist evental theory is exposed as absurd, and oriental, by its most earnest depiction. Just as some theories claim that celestial objects recede when approached so as to maintain the initial distance, the Phenomenal itself might likewise shatter into its conspiratorial potential when Empirically probed: the astronauts did depart for the moon, but they landed in a Hollywood studio.

>>20410514
In this sense, it is not surprising that so much Empirical information provided by NASA seems to contain an almost deliberate conspiratorial obverse, and that NASA itself is thereby the prominent “conspiracy theorist”. In fact, “objective” space, the Phenomenal, would be far more believable as an explicit conspiracy theory: the conspiratorial obverse could be ignored if the powers confessed that NASA fabricates everything, and the Phenomenal would thereby be intellectually rehabilitated. Instead, NASA cannot help itself, its information gets transmuted into conspiracy just as the trajectory of the astronauts, because it is not the conspiracy of NASA, but the conspiracy of the Phenomenal, of the film, itself: Johan and the island, the fabled contact of Subject and Object allegedly vivifying them both, produce nothing but each other’s transmutation into illusion, and paradoxically, for Marxist imbeciles, their purely oriental mutual annihilation. However, this is precisely where Veronica is. Why is the flight from Matter the common denominator of all Materialists? The theoretical detour is as tiresome as the Materialist maneuver itself, suffice to say that the gap between the bad Law and the good Law should have been conclusively closed, according to Materialist pretense most of all. Materialism has failed at this, of course, as it has failed at everything, but, moreover, its oblique trajectory of ridding itself of Matter proper, as well as of History proper, and tragically so, the former being the only thing distinguishing the latter from make-believe, betrays an unspeakable realization: that the only thing bridging the gap between the bad Law and the good Law is the Gnostic advent. A “traumatic encounter”, indeed. The further claim that there are no such things as Material or Historical Objects makes the realization all but explicit, that this is a fatal wound, said Objects being taboo to preclude them, one of them, from being negatives of the wound, from which its outline, and its hard reality, might be ascertained. Far from being a concession, pondering the Material aspect of Gnosticism is prominently Gnostic, among the most transgressive thoughts; a phantom appearing in a room with no openings. Christian debate on antinomianism is warped around this vanishing point, a fabricated “gap”, meant to obscure the fact that the colloquially moral, the Philosophical Good, is the fatal exit wound of the Gnostic advent. Law is otherwise pure Veronica, and the abomination of “moral law” is its Alma. Whereas the Gnostic distinction is as radical as that between excrement and food, Pharisaic sadomasochism all but confessing that Law is excrement, and that “moral law” is its demented perception when in coprophagic, faithful, ecstasy.

>>20410520
“This world is a corpse-eater. All the things eaten in it themselves die also. Truth is a life-eater. Therefore no one nourished by truth will die. It was from that place that Jesus came and brought food. To those who so desired, he gave life, that they might not die.” Ontological debate is likewise warped around the vanishing point of Occasionalism, and, moreover, of the fact that it alone makes the Phenomenal coherent. Occasionalism is the only guarantee that nominalism is not true, it is the only answer to the question of why is there something other than uniform quantitative Causal porridge. That, indeed, they constitute a perverse coincidence, the only Occasion being in and of the mind of Yaldabaoth, is precisely the point and the exegesis of the Universal crime. Moral debate is likewise warped around the vanishing point of sin. Catholic sin is as intellectually bankrupt as it is morally so: if God were to reverse his “objective” morality, the Catholic would have no choice but to respect the reversal, and, moreover, to respect indefinite reversal, so much so that the “objective” morality would be indistinguishable from bestial impulse in a vacuous Cosmos. Quite the “natural revelation”. This reversibility also compromises salvation itself, the fact of reversibility hanging over actual salvation is enough, regardless of Demiurgic lies. Whereas sin reaches not so much maximum gravity, but any gravity whatsoever, in Gnosticism alone: since it is the only idea explicitly acknowledging Monadic Evil, the potential for any and all acts to be absolutely Evil and irreversibly so, irrespective of anyone’s Law or will, is actual in Gnosticism alone. All value, whether “use”, “exchange”, or “sign”, which enables the masquerade of reversal of all acts, is thereby destroyed, sin being almost literally solid. That, indeed, it is the sin of the Father, Yaldabaoth, and that it is the world itself, is precisely the point. Scriptural debate is likewise warped around the vanishing point of Scripture itself. What exactly unites the Old and New Testaments? Catholic interpretation fabricates an implicit “Pauline Testament”, which symmetrically erases both the Christological advent and the Demiurgic nightmare. Whereas only the Gnostic reads them both for what they are. In fact, the pejoratively postmodern can be Historically traced back to Catholic, and Pharisaic, apology. Of course, the “gap” is fabrication, and the Gnostic advent “bridges” it by rending Alma from Veronica. Incidentally, a similarly cryptic renunciation lies at the foundation of psychoanalysis, the analyst preemptively gives up on his desire, projecting his solipsism onto the Phenomenal, and affirms the solipsism of the Phenomenal, a reverse misappropriation.

>>20410527
To briefly “psychoanalyze” the Catholic: the apocryphal dimension of Catholic morality is the (questionable) idea that the Catholic is Ontologically incapable of manifesting and enjoying the depravity that he desires, thus abstains therefrom in order to offer it to God in its entirety, that he might fully manifest it, and to find himself at its receiving end. Ted Bundy as a Catholic saint: since Catholics proudly claim that they would accept indefinite torture provided that it is experienced as “a story”, “an unfolding”, “a process”, etc., can one categorically exclude the possibility that Bundy’s victims fell for his guise only because they knew, or wanted, what was behind it? A true Catholic saint, a microcosm of the whole world, maintaining the criminal Différence to the very end, he babbled in his final hour just as the world writhes under Philosophical scrutiny, irrelevant flavors of garbage meant to stay the execution, Différent cockroaches scurrying for their lives. Let the Gnostic advent set Gehenna on fire. How is Alma rent from Veronica? “The mirror has been shattered. But what do the shards reflect? Can you tell me that?” Is different sameness the Alma of Veronica’s same difference? Yes, but no. Taking a peculiar detour: Socionics describes perception as split into four parts, Extraverted Sensing (Se), Introverted Intuition (Ni), Extraverted Intuition (Ne), Introverted Sensing (Si), and forming two axes, Se-Ni and Ne-Si. Perhaps the definitional debate is likewise warped around a vanishing point, that the two ends of each axis are not complementary, oriental, but Bergmanian, that they map onto 2 and 0. The axes are colloquially described as cones, the extraverted end being the base and the introverted the tip. However, the progress of Ne is always embedded into Si, and the tradition of Si is always fabricated by Ne, they constitute the continuity of the similar, the masquerade of Différence. Curiously, the Se-Ni axis does not suffer from the same perversity, it is the discontinuity of the dissimilar: a vulgar analysis would claim that the actuality of Se can only be engendered by the abstraction of Ni, that an intercession of the abstract is necessary for the distinction of two actualities, the Se-Ni axis being just as perverse as the former. However, if one takes actuality and abstraction seriously, one must conclude that actuality is metastatic presence and abstraction is true absence (2), unlike Ne-Si, progress and tradition, whose serious definitions are precisely their cryptic coincidence. There are no axes proper, Ne-Si being a circle and Se-Ni being arelational. That is to say, Ne-Si is the mirror whereby Veronica reflects as Alma, and Se-Ni shatters that mirror, rending Alma from Veronica. The different sameness operating against the same difference.

>>20410532
Why is Veronica the Christian Subject against which the Gnostic advent operates, rather than Johan as the Christian, as in suspended between Catholicism and Gnosticism, Subject which the advent transforms and defines as Gnostic? This is an extremely Evil question. Some claim that the Subject is a fractal continuation of THE Subject, the Father, and conclude that it is good. Others that it is a Satanic opposition, and conclude that it is bad. Whereas the Gnostic position pairs the first claim with the second conclusion, the Subject otherwise constitutes an Ne-Si coincidence with its oriental annihilation. Johan being Jesus and Veronica-Alma the thieves would be the same difference. Rather, Johan is the interaxial mirror being shattered. The Christological reference must be handled very carefully. Johan is figuratively crucified: eaten from the inside-out by Veronica, who penetrates him along with the other man-eaters in their cryptic encounter, and from the outside-in by Alma, as she is hugging him after finding him kneeling in the woods. He is suspended between the darkness of Veronica and the ignorance of Alma, between the mouth of Alma and the anus of Veronica; traversing the abortion canal. Incidentally, Johan is decomposed alive, perhaps Yaldabaoth takes the Catholic for his word, that there is no mind-body distinction, and forces him to experience his own decomposition. Regardless, a man-eater rises in his place just before his final scene, Baron von Merkens himself, Yaldabaoth, who claimed to be Veronica’s lover, and told Johan that he will witness their encounter, feigning jealously. Perhaps this is the only instance where the film is as Gnostic as the interpretation: an obvious allusion to the jealousy of Yahweh, sanitized by his apocryphal helplessness, possessed by bestial experience. Yaldabaoth now revealing whence he witnessed the encounter, not by spying from the appalling distance of the chaotic “real”, from beyond the “gap”, but by creating the encounter itself as a “gap” to obscure his cogent presence. Of the many failures of Marx and Marxism, the failure to identify sex as Veronica and production as Alma is truly unforgivable. The Son is the first commodity, meant to indefinitely reproduce the Father, to preemptively abort any and all things into his image. It is the same difference. Rather, Johan splits the Subject not so much in half but, per the discontinuity of the dissimilar, the Subject is passed onto Veronica, who is now visible, and not-Johan disappears along with Alma, who is now invisible.

>>20410537
Apropos of visible-invisible, a Gnostic viewing would surely notice two curious pairs of scenes: the first pair of the scene wherein Johan tells Alma that they are invited to the castle and the next scene wherein the Archons introduce themselves, the former ending and the latter beginning with the fourth wall being stared at, by Johan and Yaldabaoth, respectively; and the second pair of the scene wherein Veronica penetrates Johan and the subsequent scene wherein he is decomposed, both ending with a voice being muted, Johan’s and Alma’s, respectively. The “Hegelian” interpretation would claim that the two pairs intersect and constitute a second pole, the second pair constituting a plane constantly perpendicular to the first plane, the fourth wall, making indefinite planes, in front or behind it, possible, thus “decentering” the film. Whereas the Gnostic interpretation would see the pure orientalism therein: nothing but an infinite and uniform matrix from which the “Hegelian” randomly chooses two points and discards the rest. Nevertheless, what is the Gnostic relevance of said pairs? Depictions of the ouroboros are likewise “Hegelian”, the tail visibly ends where the mouth begins, their contours coincide, another orientalism, however, the tip of the tail, or the glans, is further inside the body of Yaldabaoth. The two pairs of scenes constitute precisely this, coordinates of the other end, a second center proper, not so much decentering the film but making it hypercentered, the glans being the second head of the same difference, subsuming any and all potential points, the Evil good; a warning that the cross is cryptic, folded into the “gap” of the cube. The first and last scene of the film ostensibly constitute the same difference, however, Alma not only turns the light on herself, but the dissolve clearly shows that the lighting of the scene does not change, the implication is that the darkness being ended is the film itself, and her identity therein. The Gnostic advent and the Christian Subject are in mortal opposition. Be disappeared by Alma or defecated by Veronica. Johan is grafted onto the Father’s mucous membrane as the prosthesis through which he ejaculates himself into the world, prolapsing himself into the ostensibly neutral Phenomenal. “For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.” The last scene also shows Alma as the free-floating opposition to psychoanalytic epiphenomenalism, a lone “Subject” not of the world, her diminuendo into absence; she even breaks the fourth wall. The true Sophianic Alma as the different sameness, invisibly infiltrating the part of the mirror of Veronica. Incidentally, Matthew 5:29-30 is an almost explicit rebuke of psychoanalytic epiphenomenalism and warning that the Subject is whole, wholly aborted.

>>20410542
One should be able to rid one’s self of desire, drive, enjoyment, etc. if these are merely contingent parts, and, indeed, it would be most profitable to do so, the result would simply be a different Subject, no more or no less contingent. Jesus is calling their bluff. It is very telling that, apparently, no one can. Even the conclusion that psychoanalysis is crypto-oriental, that the parts are as the Divine loci of the Subject, Platonic vulgarity dressed in drag, is not pathetic enough. Perhaps in its extraverted obsession to resemble biological epiphenomenalism, it has gotten a little ahead of itself and instead resembles the ideological excrement thereof, evolutionary psychology, the crown jewel of Anglo cretinism. An indefinite “anal stage” wherein Freudian dejection is fossilized inside the colon of History. Regardless, the same blueprint is found in Silent Hill 2. What is Mary suffering from? Recall that Silent Hill is a place of phantasmagoria, why trust the denouement that it itself provides? Perhaps James and Mary-Maria map onto Johan and Veronica-Alma. James is wholly destroyed: the possibility that James murdered Mary in Silent Hill “first”, that he is a demon who manifests Silent Hill to lure Maria, the living one, to transmute her into Mary, the dead one, that Mary is suffering from the murder itself, that her indefinite dying has released Maria, her “soul”, into its full immortality, or malignant vitality, that she can thereby be said to reorient Silent Hill around her, turning James into the normal man that vulgar interpretation claims him to be; all of this totally compromises, aborts, James. One of the game’s endings shows Maria coughing as she leaves Silent Hill with James. Far from being an allusion to recapitulation, this ending shows a true separation between Mary-Veronica, the bottomless pit of misery, and Maria-Alma, the ignorance thereof, a true death, the latter being as a “soul” aborting itself from the “body” of sex, and taking not-James-Johan with her. As for the true Alma and not-Johan, they are as Rita and Betty…However, a truly Gnostic analysis would surely suspect that this interpretation of the ending is the crypto-Atonement, and a means by which the Victor becomes a modality of the Atonement, terminal perversity. Suffice to say that the spear can only be destroyed by the wound that is smote. György unearths the other life. Apocryphally, the film is pure Gnosticism. It begins with the very Gnostic thesis that the Phenomenal is nothing but a lie. Subjects pretending to be celestial bodies inside a crypt, Archonic make-believe. In this sense, the scene does not “mean” anything at all. Rather, who is animating who?

>>20410545
János is the byproduct of the aforementioned cryptic encounter, solicited by one of the drunks, the sun, to choreograph the Universe. The tempting Marxist interpretation is surprisingly relevant, for equally surprising reasons: Marxism claims that the reality of the world is suspended between three positions, that it was discovered and is discovered now, that it was invented and is invented now, and that it was discovered and is invented now; the opening scene constitutes the conspicuously missing fourth position, that the world was invented and is discovered now, the Gnostic thesis. Moreover, the invention is explicitly shown to be one-sided, János only appears when solicited, and the Archons sardonically play along with his instructions, just as the Phenomenal sardonically plays along with the “laws of physics”, invented by the Catholic, by János. Terrorizing exhibitionism, total penetration, no Dialectic. A total eclipse, indeed. János then walks out into the dead of night, having received no pay for his services, the “real” sun failing to manifest, it only does so a few scenes later, a cut preventing its superposition with a black television screen faintly reflecting the room wherein János confessed his ignorance; one can hardly imagine a more Gnostic sequence. In fact, the film “itself” becomes fanciful, as does the question of György’s identity. Is he half of János? Is he János from the future? Is he the whale? Is he the television? Is he the Gnostic “Subject” interacting with the Catholic in an allegory of History? György’s initial scene beings and ends with him sleeping. Even the cliche that the whole film is his dream, although tempting since the whale arrives in the next scene, both scenes preceding the rise of the Black Sun, falls short of the Gnostic position that characters can distance themselves from their filmic reality, lending themselves to being woken, so to speak, so much so that such a position would “wake” said characters, removing them from the film. Right after sunrise, György himself speaks of “the realization of non-music”, that musical notes are “distinct and independent qualities”, rather than constituting an octave. In this sense, nothing happens “between Kant and Hegel”: far from “connecting dots” or “coinciding opposites”, the Gnostic position should be, first, a rejection of intertextual reading and, second, a realization that it is this very reading which is guilty of everything that it accuses the pejoratively Protestant reading of. Intertextual reading is pure solipsism, and, moreover, solipsism of the pyschoanalytic kind, based on the implicit maneuver of ascribing it to a fantastic Phenomenal, the natural revelation embedded therein being just as perversely false as the Phenomenal itself.

>>20410550
In this sense, this is the film’s actuality, anti-anamorphosis, György is the vantage point disappearing into the film it destroys as fatal venom disappears into necrotic tissue; the permanent eclipse. Truly rendering to Caesar: Tünde is Rome, recruiting György to “restore order” makes the maneuver ouroboric, she disregards him once he acquiesces, the question of why did she solicit him in the first place, especially since she is later revealed to have powers that a vulgar interpretation would call undue, is very relevant to the Gnostic position. Whether the Christological mirror reflecting Yaldabaoth so well that the reflection comes to life, or the Christological suicide taking the command of indefinite dying further and achieving death, rendering to Caesar transfigures omnipotence into incontinence. The question of what Tünde wanted becomes irrelevant, and the ouroboric maneuver becomes necessary to obscure the question of why Tünde wants to being with. The film itself says that “they” want János dead, but does specify whether it is the crowd possessed by the whale and the Prince or Tünde’s military. Apropos of ouroboric maneuvers, Lacan’s whole work is based on an unforgivable orientalism: the fabled gaze should have been the first, and the only, thing split into “partial object”, into the two eyes, instead of constituting an idyllic Yin-Yang, not to mention constituting Lacan’s refusal to “be Oedipalized”. Fortunately, Tarr provides more than enough in this regard. When first encountering the whale, János circumscribes it, passing by both of its eyes, however, during his second encounter, he only stares into one eye, the one that he first passed by in the previous encounter, the right one, which somehow grants him access to the Prince’s impossible chamber. One eye is the mouth and the other the anus. The eyes forming a torus, colon, vampiric fang, abortion canal. Concentric eyes, one seeing the inside of the sphere and the other the outside. The eclipse as celestial bodies paying tribute to the abomination of the gaze, one eye casting its shadow over their prey as the other illuminates it. A true “anti-Oedipus”, and perhaps the true face of the Dualism in the Catholic’s nightmares. János is of Yaldabaoth, he runs away from the cryptic encounter only to turn around and run back toward the square now exploding with violence, and is only seen again inside the hospital, as the crowd that vandalized it and attacked its patients is leaving. Curiously, there are no doctors. The sequence does not “mean” anything.

>>20410556
It is simply Demiurgic pornography, not only from the vantage point of the perpetrator, but from that of the penetrator: disregarding the “neutral” issues of free will, that of freedom being contingent on the injunction of choice, free will is dogma in Catholicism and vulgar Christianity precisely because it is the free will of the woman’s phallus, the children of God are as an alibi for their own sodomy, allegedly participating therein for no reason other than coinciding with the locus of sodomy itself, having “free will”. There are no doctors because the patients are there to be beaten, and János is seen in the hospital because Yaldabaoth created the whole event around his return to the scene. Similarly, the appalling sequence of the same piece of diegetic music continuing from the scene wherein Tünde sends János to the police chief’s house to put his children to bed while she dances with him and the next scene wherein János is in his house; an almost explicit depiction of the absolutely damned sex-child continuum. In this sense, the crucifixion darkness does not “mean” anything. It is simply atrocity itself, the true death of Jesus revealing what is always there, the “gap” is rent and the Monadic Evil of the Father, Yaldabaoth, momentarily shows itself, the black mucous membrane ever-licking the hypercadaver. A disclosure of the indefinite putrefaction, the putrifixion, a keyhole through which the Gnostic is pupil to pupil with Yaldabaoth. Suicide is taboo precisely because it destroys this “private”, rather than “public”, property. The fatal shard turns the breaking of vessels against that which demands it. Logically, an indefinite progress cannot be sustained by indefinitely breakable shards, since that which makes them indefinitely breakable also makes them indefinitely susceptible to regressive reconstitution of the whole vessel, whether real or imaginary, this being their cryptic purpose, of course; the shard of Christ taking the pretense seriously and being the unbreakable shard, thereby destroying it, a veritable vessel of breaking. “I have overcome the world”. Moreover, this is absolutely distinguished from psychoanalytic misappropriation about “lost objects” and “traumatic encounters”, not to mention from their crypto-oriental unity: the Law has always been insane, it is now “fulfilled” by the revelation of its Evil good end, the glans, hitherto hidden inside the Evil end, the head, the latter being only the absence of the former, indeed; the Father, Yaldabaoth, retaining his excrement all throughout the Old Testament, waiting for its perfect receiver, in a mystical “absence of good”, of his relief. The pretense is finally dropped but Jesus Christ disappears, the crucifixion darkness being as obscene as the sight of literal excrement. More to the point that the Canonical Gospels are the most Gnostic texts, the event is only described therein.

>>20410560
There is a similar luminous anomaly in the film, the scene wherein János is reading the confession in the white room, almost the whole film being otherwise black and grey. Adding to Baudrillard’s speculation about light itself as Ontologically perverse (Fatal Strategies): light as stomach acid, not the banal idea that light destroys what it illuminates, but that it, almost conversely, imprisons it into vivifying sodomy. János is frozen from inside-out as the indefinite fodder for the inside-out stomach ever-digesting him, a digerrotype. In this sense, what distinguishes one’s actual organs from the choking hands of Yaldabaoth, from the crushing soles of Yaldabaoth, from the rending teeth of Yaldabaoth? Whose confession is it? János is grafted onto Yaldabaoth, penetrated from the inside-out, he is the head, the merely Evil end, whereby Yaldabaoth saves himself, the “we” narrating the confession being precisely the Evil good end, the glans, obscured by the fabricated “gap” of the Atonement, and sardonically speaking as if they were not one and the same. The initially disembodied voice was always hyperembodied. No crowd, no vacuous contingency, no Dialectic, just Monadic Evil. The nails pierce from the inside-out, iron bars shooting out of every eye, mouth, nose, ear, genital, anus, pore, dream, one is thereby indefinitely damned to excrete one’s own prison. There is no distinction between the white of the light and the white of the fire, after all. The Catholic was right again! The uncanny trope in Catholicism and vulgar Christianity of Heaven facilitating ignorance of God, and Hell forcing its prisoners to witness a proper paternal climax, confirms the blueprint. One would surely conclude that Hell is locked from the inside precisely because it is the locus of the Father, Yaldabaoth, if one had no prejudice. The white room confirming that the infernal climax literally comes out of one’s mouth. In this sense, the blood of Christ is vantablack. The fatal opacity of laying down one’s life destroys the vista of Narcissus: not only precluding Yaldabaoth from seeing his reflection over the face of the waters, but, moreover, drowning the reflection. Why stop at Abraham? There are two more white instances in the film: the penultimate scene and the white room in the otherwise black and grey hospital scene. Taking the Catholic for his word, perhaps natural revelation was true all along: a contest comparing the beauty of livestock cadavers, for example, if one cannot see God therein, one cannot see God elsewhere. Or, figuratively, the most beautiful cadaver as the Christian holiday, the worst crime celebrated by proudly relishing its commodification, and reenacting it through libidinal zoophagic frenzy.

>>20410565
Can any Gnostic deny that he wants to see Catholics’ guts burst with the force of Gehenna itself? Walking two miles, the subversive potential of the Christ-Lucifer coincidence is simply not there. Rather, Gnostic Christianity coincides with this Gehennian experience. There is a different sameness proper: Gehenna is, of course, of Yaldabaoth, but seeing it in such a way, the holes in the two hands aligned by them being clasped in prayer, as it were, is a catastrophe. The subtraction of Jesus Christ from the crucifixion turns the radiant black of the darkness into a vantablack vanishing point, from beyond which the Gnostic Christian is seen by, and in turn sees with, the omnicidal gaze of THE LION. The first white scene of the film is precisely the one wherein the crowd stops their hospital assault after seeing the victim, who is the Victor. Incidentally, two men simultaneous pulling the curtains and simultaneously looking at each other, a confirmation that they are Demiurgic puppets. This scene is also a trap of the same difference, beguiling one into identifying the victim as Jesus and the two figures as the thieves, while also being a scene of different sameness. Gehenna was not supposed to be seen as such, but the “vanishing mediator” actually vanishes, constituting the anti-thermodynamic, anti-Différent, and anti-psychoanalytic event: a single dead pixel in the pupil of Yaldabaoth, the coincidence of the opaque thicket from beyond which the predator of being itself gazes and the opacity of the gaze itself, the mortification of the “Real”. In this sense, perhaps it is Yaldabaoth who could not “endure unto the end”. Why did Jesus not suffer more? Obviously, a normal life of slavery ending in the misery of disability, dementia, incontinence, and being hated by his Apostles, would have been far more painful. The speed and stealth with which he died betrays a certain Demiurgic knowledge of the fatal intercession of Panthera. In the penultimate scene, and the last white one, György is dressed in all black, bathed in the blood of Christ, freely walking in and out of János’ prison, despite explicitly stating his own delinquency. The fact that the Victor and the Atonement all but coincide, and that the former has distinguished itself from the latter despite all worldly power trying to eat it, is the only thing worthy of being called a miracle. The fact that Catholics do not therefore prostrate themselves before Gnosticism is the ultimate proof that they do not actually believe what they are saying.

>>20410569
The last scene needing almost no interpretation: the cadaver of Yaldabaoth on the cross of the rent cuboid, the eye through which God destroys György is the same eye through which György destroys God; György turning around as he is walking away and giving him a second gaze, just as he did to János, distancing himself from the first gaze, total affirmation of the Gnostic advent as the exit, regardless of its triumphant entrance; Black Gnosticism…In Mulholland Drive, the hitman tells Diane that she will find the key “where he told her” as a sign that the murder has been performed. The viewer first sees the key in Diane’s apartment, in a previous scene, and assumes that she must have found it elsewhere, and that the scenes are part of a linear chronology, merely presented out of order. The implication that the hitman left it in her apartment invisibly creeps into the film itself in the absence of analysis, just as the hitman is implied to have crept in Diane’s absence. The crypt of Subjectivity is the ideal locus of Demiurgic annunciation, whence the nails are guaranteed to pierce, from the inside-out. Where else could the key be placed? Moreover, how could it be placed under absolute secrecy if not by preceding the apartment and the linear chronology, which constitute the perfect guise for the Semiosis of abomination? Who or what are the elderly couple? The interpretation that they are “superegoic” parental figures is as vulgar as it is sterile, as psychoanalysis itself is, rather, they are in and of the apartment, their ridiculous entrance implies as much. The viewer is all but forced to disbelieve. The man is the key and the woman is Diane herself. Diane’s question to the hitman is likewise silenced by tepid “moral” interpretation; unsurprisingly, also psychoanalytic. Perhaps the hitman laughs not because she should have known what it figuratively opens, the vulgar Pandora’s box, but because she cannot possibly know what it literally opens: that he has already placed it in her apartment, in her, or rather, placed her around the key, that she is what is being opened, disclosed, as a guise for him murdering Camilla. This is the meaning of natural revelation, according to Catholics, an alibi for Yaldabaoth’s perfect crime, laughing with him as he murders them. The Subjects are the crypts in which the keys are laundered. The apparition of the elderly man is the key itself, the Demiurgic Semiosis, that of the elderly woman being Diane herself, turned inside-out, her obverse which faces the key, preemptively and eternally married to him, to slave away, “dreaming” of theodicies and such.

>>20410576
This is the only way in which they are her parents, by a revelation of parenthood as something totally alien to the idyllic dream. Indeed, has psychoanalysis ever addressed parents’ sexual depravity toward their children, rather than vice versa? The fact that it never plays with a full deck is reason enough to spit in its face. The fact that Diane is forced into the bedroom and onto the bed by the apparitions needs no interpretation. Diane’s question is true Sophianic anamnesis of the different sameness, not remembering what was forgotten but, just as Gnosticism is a truly discontinuous advent from nowhere, being granted the very discontinuity whereby one can know things necessarily precluded by remembering, rather than forgetting, the latter being a guise for said preclusion. Perhaps Yaldabaoth nervously laughs at almost being exposed. Moreover, perhaps it is the viewer who does something at his expense, being quiet, along with Diane. The same discontinuity granting her the knowledge that she has no recourse but to destroy herself, and granting her true death. More to the point that the Gnostic introspection is a veritable autopsy. Diane launders the key by subtracting the key from the blue, not vice versa, as she was ordered. Who is crying for whose love? It is no coincidence that the blue box is shown to contain a vantablack vanishing point whereby Betty disappears, or that the box appeared in Club Silencio, as she witnessed the mocking Demiurgic lamentation, herself and Rita as verse and obverse of his autofellatio. The box is the breech of her gun. The last scene is absolutely ballistic, Betty and Rita as they appear through the Demiurgic gaze now being shattered. Allowing myself one Catholic perversion of Scripture: and why beholdest thou the forceps that is in thy son’s skull, but considerest not the gun barrel that is in thine own mouth?

1: https://litdump.tumblr.com/post/670565355161305088/the-problem-of-good

2: https://litdump.tumblr.com/post/670566308808622080/the-abomination-of-presence

It ate one of the posts. Thanks, /lit/. The board itself is just as shitty, technically, as its posts are. Fuck you. Full post here: https://litdump.tumblr.com/post/685065562432454656/cryptic-abortions

The realization that Strangelove, who affirms the device, and President Muffley, who denies it, are played by the same actor is the negative of the Gnostic advent: the realization that the device being and not being is the same difference, or Différence, that the Occasion of Peter Sellers, so to speak, betrays a contiguity that is the mortal enemy of the advent, the device being only the Demiurgic fold on either side of which it is and is not, the means by which the mirror of the “big bang” perpetuates the masquerade of quantity by providing a false end. What comes out of Strangelove’s mouth is preemptively recycled, aborted, in President Muffley’s mouth. The Subjective panopticon is simply a topological inversion of an object observed from all vantage points, the gaze being substantial thus integral to a true topology. The gaze being Yaldabaoth himself, the crypt being pierced by its abortion from within, the crypt being the “gap” from behind which the forceps penetrates. All life forms being forcefully vivified, sodomized into being, for indefinite torture from the inside-out. In this sense, not even incontinence escapes being incontinently destroyed by Yaldabaoth. The eye is not precluded from seeing itself, such phrases being cryptic abortions, odious fragments from the pitch black. Rather, sensory limits comprise a proper crypt, whence the eye cannot be said to see anything but itself, just as the Subject cannot be anything but itself, a cryptic abortion; both abortions from crypts and abortions as crypts. A “gap” acting as a cloak between Yaldabaoth’s mouth and tail, or phallus, Strangelove and President Muffley as the verse and obverse thereof. In this sense, the most literal, and most grievous, reading of Matthew 15:11-19 is the Gnostic one. Indeed, “that which cometh out of the mouth” is absolutely worse, and, moreover, “the heart” from which it erupts is the substance of the Father, Yaldabaoth, himself. The uncanny interruption of Strangelove’s explanation being a “Hermetic” warning to not fall for this device, and, moreover, one whose thinking and reception is most ambiguous: the impossibility of a film character realizing that he is a character played by an actor, hearing his own words aborted back into the fabric of crypt, and the impossibility of the aforementioned theory coinciding therewith and effectively granting him said realization. Strangelove is the pagan Subject being granted the Christological advent, subtracted from the Demiurgic cycle by a doubly yonic extervention. To avoid falling for the device, one must be wary of the theoretical perversity whereby the Gnostic advent can, and will, be an abomination, just as the Catholic one is, if one thinks it is in vulgar opposition thereto. For the advent to be for the receiver proper, not for indefinitely indebting him, not for his recycling into that which it saves him from, not for the onanism of the giver, the advent has to literally not be.

>>20410635

This was supposed to follow this: >>20410498

>>20410455
bumping

>>20410455
>>20410459
>>20410464
>>20410470
>>20410476
>>20410486
>>20410494
>>20410498
>>20410503
>>20410514
>>20410520
>>20410527
>>20410532
>>20410537
>>20410542
>>20410545
>>20410550
>>20410556
>>20410560
>>20410565
>>20410569
>>20410576
>>20410583
>>20410635
whaz zero pussy does to a mf

>>20410583
>no paragraphs

God damnit schizo-poster. Printing and will respond when I finish reading these.

not a fucking word

>just as rococo distinguishes itself from baroque
These terms are so academic and divorced from anything happening in the real world that i dropped out here already. People who care about art history "eras" are ivory tower theorists who have nothing to say and I've literally never met someone who was an exception.

>>20410626

Anyway, this board is abysmal now (see: >>20410993). I've been skimming all this time since my last post, nothing but shit, might as well be /x/ or /mu/. Sad. So much so that I made tw*tter. So far I've found the Landian-Marxist circle, the what-if-normal-philosophy-but-WEED-SEX-INTERNET-lmao circle, the academics posting hegel memes circle, if anyone knows where the /lit/-schizoposting circle is, irrespective of trannies, I'll be here: https://twitter.com/aeonbaudrillard.. /tv/ suck a fat cock too, by the way.

>>20411030
embarrassing

>>20411030
>>20410993
Filtered unironically

the vulgar child is the woman’s phallus inserting itself into the cosmic woman socially. our child is the Other in Dr. Strangelove filtering bodily fluids for the Christological Atonement. who is animating who? the colon vampire: the prince of the abject. Catholicism forbids the Ash Vampire Subject.

The Pope hates the Gamer

maximum gravity Gnostic final hours Gehenna of Ice

THE seventh trial (was as follows): "After these things the word of the Lord came unto Abram in a vision, saying" (Gen. 15:1). To all the prophets He was revealed in a vision, but to Abraham He was revealed in a revelation and in a vision. Whence do we know of the revelation? Because it is said, "And the Lord appeared unto him by the oaks of Memre"

Idolatry? an idol? Id-El: A visible (open) representation of the noumenon? Regardless, hijacking the Demiurgic planes, pagan Theology separates desire of being a “Hermetic” from the pitch black void breaking the reciprocity machine inherent to every Catholic Hegel ontology (commodification).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXkKbJlY0NY

>>20410635
>>20410626
>>20410583
TL;DR before my response: Basically OP makes three major arguments here: 1) to sense is to have an external Other put into the world (i.e. soul into matter) which he likens to matter-sodomy, 2) ontological categories such as quantities and squares / circles require their own negation - essentially for an axiom to be created it must also thereby create its own contradiction, 3) The experience of forgiveness is how (1) is maintained via being a type of excuse for this process and thus Gnosticism is correct. OP then goes through and uses 1 and 2 to try to get to 3. Effectively, it's a compelling analysis of many movies such as Dr. Strange Love and Mulholland Dr. at the end.

I haven't seen all of the movies so I'm sure I've missed some things. That being said, OP fails in his final project. The analysis of Catholicism, or Christianity, vs. Gnosticism requires OP to suspend his ontological framework of contradictions as accessing truth (*). For example, forgiveness is an excuse for the world not the contradiction of sin-as-recognition which also is the vehicle of transcendence. Christ as vantablack is not also paired with Christ is pure light *and* vantablack. Additionally, OP requires, for his Gnosticism to be correct, that the category of transcendent to exist without the act of the particularity of transcendence in Christ. This is not the final analysis because fallenness is the thing which allows for transcendence which is the recognition of fallenness which is guilt and transcendence in one. It's a great essay but in the final analysis the ability to see forgiveness as the final contradiction between: Free will allows for sin which allows for forgiveness and forgiveness surpasses sin via free will. Additionally, OP does not use his analysis on the concept of Evil itself, which is taken as a given from Yaldaboath and not as what it is - which is the God-machine of potentiality between Being and non-Being operated at the soul-level where each infinity chooses between two infinities.

* This is basically fundamental to the thought of OP so it requires some explanation. For example: To objectively think the subject turns the subject into its own object. To think subjectively one turns one's object into a subject. OP does this repeatedly throughout mathematics, Capital, history, and the concept of being and non-being vs being.

Great essays, OP. Looking forward to reading more and your analysis of Mulholland Drive was first-rate.

>>20411098
>can't refute what I said
>Y-you got filtered! Filtered alert!!
just tell me why you think I'm wrong then bro

>>20410455
>>20410459
>>20410464
>>20410470
>>20410476
>>20410486
>>20410494
>>20410498
>>20410503
>>20410514
>>20410520
>>20410527
>>20410532
>>20410537
>>20410542
>>20410545
>>20410550
>>20410556
>>20410560
>>20410565
>>20410569
>>20410576
>>20410583
>>20410635
youre a faggot, btw Im a baptist and agree with eveything anti-catholic you said

>>20411485
>These terms are so academic and divorced from anything happening in the real world that i dropped out here already.
> I've been skimming all this

>>20411485
OP is a genius he just doesn't realizes that he integrates the Otherness of existence in the beginning and then splits it out again with Christ. He uses an arbitrary Other which is a reference outside of itself when he speaks about Christ but not about itself. He fails his own ideology but he is a genius.

>>20410455
>>20411206
An interesting Catholic blog, by the by:

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/cosmostheinlost/

>>20411917
thank you for this!

I really don’t understand the obsession with ugly aesthetics that so many readers of latter continental material has, I mean I get after a matter it’s the aesthetic ramification of fixation on the difference/otherness, what with self and unity being essential to the beautiful, but I don’t see the appeal.

The argument begins incorrectly in thinking that Christianity is a religion of meaningless death, of sacrifice for its own sake, which while perhaps the interpretation of the common person and a number of cultural movers and Shakers, is not at all the purpose of it according to itself, which seeks fulfillment of the Will of God no matter what, and the sacrifice, life, death and other such simply being a fulfillment of the love of God and satisfaction of his will, the ignoring of love is what taints so many of these thinkers, what makes their world dark, which corrupts their mind into depression. Not to mention that yaldabaoth and Gnosticism Is no monolith either, yaldabaoth is most commonly a personified form of one’s own reason or the creation itself, the dialectic of destruction and reformation is not this but rather of self nature and otherness through the interaction of transcendental ego, one with consciousness, interacting with the faculty of perception as the origin of otherness, producing representation and the multiplicity of knowledge in its unity and diversity.

The discussion on color and the other is simply a weaker form of codependent origination and the phenomenological schools broad approach to Kant’s noumena as being identical to the phenomena in all but formal distinction, being fundamentally your yaldabaoth, your own rationalizing processes dividing them.

There is also the common problem of inversion, of seeing not the feminine and masculine as symbolic of the ontological forces but the inverse, again a side effect of obsession of how things are other, thus the female, the ugly, the uncontrolled and so forth is worshipped while kept truly at a distance, for if the feminine was truly harmonized with mentally it would no longer be seen as something different, there is no vampirism where love is.

>>20411613
This is in Hegel and elaborated upon better.

>>20412028
>This is in Hegel and elaborated upon better.
which work

Didn't read any of this ramble but I compliment you on your taste in paintings.

>>20412056
Science of logic and phenomenology of spirit both go at length at the unity of existence and otherness and their coupling, which he directly relates to man and sees as the conscious of man performing as well as reflected in the historical events of human history and in Christ in his theological writings

https://hegel.net/hegelwerke/Hegel1948-OnChristianity-EarlyTheologicalWritings.pdf

>>20412078
Don't have memory of it in PoS ty.

tl;dr?

>>20412082
Read literally just this

https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/works/hl/hlbeing.htm#HL1_82

>>20412089
only if you get beers with me in EV

>>20411613
By the way if you want titanic elaborations upon the concept of difference and the relation of perception and conscious with otherness, you have a lot of options. Here’s a few.

https://monoskop.org/images/8/80/Merleau_Ponty_Maurice_The_Visible_and_the_Invisible_1968.pdf

https://www.amazon.com/Philosophies-Difference-Critical-Introduction-Non-philosophy/dp/0826436633 (You can find a pdf)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Difference_and_Repetition

There is an incredible amount written on this topic.

>>20412142
>https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Difference_and_Repetition
One of my most hated books. The Maurice book looks interesting thank you!

>>20412028
>death and other such simply being a fulfillment of the love of God and satisfaction of his will, the ignoring of love
>Divine love is a blank check that Yaldabaoth writes himself, the means of indefinite abomination. Love should be rejected not because Yahweh is Yaldabaoth and his ostensibly true love is false, but precisely because Yaldabaoth is Yahweh and his ostensibly false love is true. Evil is the presence of good.

When I say ABYSMAL...

>>20413165
Good and evil ultimately derive from the love of God, both evil and Good are movements towards god, good a movement to God as being and with qualities, evil towards God without qualities and as the general, the without qualities, sunyata and so forth.

It is not “false love” it is love in both the most human sense and the most ontological and technical form it can possibly be, complaints about abominations, murderers and tragedies are nothing more than weak appeals to pathos and do not actually have a leg to stand on when placed against any systematic and grander view of the divine will, his nature, law, and of morality itself. For such definitions of abomination ultimately derive from God.

The only yaldabaoth is the Yaldabaoth that exists within your mind, the reason within you which categorizes the phenomena and concepts, that is the corrupted image of God, its definitions while partially still ultimately deriving in their actual aspects from God. All meaning in the technical sense, all definition, determination, derives from God. It is his love which is perichoretic that is the ontological origin of creation.

>>20413201
>It is not “false love”
>but precisely because Yaldabaoth is Yahweh and his ostensibly false love is true

For fuck's sake, can you even read? Appalling.

Fuck the demiurge and his slaves

>>20411578
>youre a faggot, btw Im a baptist and agree with eveything anti-catholic you said

You chose your declared father the devil,lol

>>20413201
Yahveh isn't yaldabaoth, gnostics eternally seething

>>20413753
Enjoy the recycling, golem

>>20410684
No...
less than zero.

>>20413201
post a burner email - there's a bookclub i wanna send you

>>20415209
New burner created, FraterAsemlen@Mail.com

>>20415226
sent

>>20415209

Why? He can't read: >>20413218