[NetBehaviour] The Curious movement of philosophies;

[Alan Sondheim]

The Curious

movement of philosophies; while existentialism is the philosophy of abject
substance, deconstruction is the thought of the virtual/cyber frame. The
former disappeared as an extractive industry with faltering natural
resources; the latter expanded as a software of the text.

I used to love existentialism when I was a kid, but now my references are
limited to the following, across the broken trajectory of writing for the
past couple of decades (culling 'existentialism' from the Internet Text):

"of Godard or the avant-garde has given way to a now empty existentialism
[... 8 lines removed ...}
Introduction to Heideggerian Existentialism/Exoteric Teaching/The Dialog"

There were a meager ten lines out of the entire Internet Text (which func-
tions as a psychoanalytical trope in this instance) - even though one of
the major strands of the work is that of abjection/annihilation; even the
vocabulary of the 'hole' is analyzed in detail.

On the other hand, references to deconstruction are too numerous to list
or analyze; it appears everywhere in the work. It's as if there's a
replacement philosophy for every philosophy, a replacement philosopher for
every philosopher. Deconstruction appears, ends up appearing as a radical
(non)-methodology for inhabiting often contrary subtexts - and this occurs
popularly in one of two ways: deconstruction proper, involving extremely
close readings and erudition; and a form of skittering deconstruction,
within which the (Web or) frame scratches against the boundaries of genre
or canon. It's this latter which appeals: a text need not be read, but
situated, and the situating carries the tags and http of analysis. In this
sense, deconstruction presences the virtual text. This isn't the decon of
Derrida, but the word and technology has escaped the proper name. So there
is a decon of Chaucer, a decon of Obama, a decon of global warming. We
inhabit this era. We participate in it. The Internet Text participates in
it and perhaps an unfortunate result is a glibness of depth which itself
is subtextual, always already present and deeply unaccounted for.

In any case, with existentialism, with decon, there's no advance proper;
at best there are veerings haunted by media, world pictures, language
games, and romantic aspirations. Science, as if it were elsewise, proceeds
apace, however, a form of circumlocution, as if always already present as
well, and deeply accounted for.

The results of culling 'deconstruction' from the Internet Text:

"                             deconstruction,
[... 200 lines removed ...]
||f|r|a|m|e|-|s|h|u(etc.)ffling|| :: matrix-deconstruction"

- framed, as one might expect, by _a diacritical paragon._