On Criticism 2

The Critic is 

“a person who expresses an unfavorable opinion of something,” 

so, the critic is defined by the party which they oppose,

(those who could deem the criticism unfavorable)

which is to say, 

the Critic comes-into-being only in opposition to an existing idea.

At the etymological root of Critic is Krinein, to judge, decide, separate. 

There is an inherent divisiveness at play in the Critic,

for there is an inherent divisiveness in all judgment,

every declaration of value stands in opposition to its other

this is the nature of Krinein, the judgment as separation.

The Critic is in Opposition to its Object

And the Critic’s judgment (marking) of the Object

will separate itself from its Object

I have called this marking Negation

for it destroys the Oneness of the Object

through its Subjective Utterance:

The Critical Utterance states that,

Whatever the Object has been known to be

It is also this, this singular Subjective transmission,

this declaration of Will, this Judgment.

The Critical transmission reveals the Object’s multiplicitous manifestation,

its Being in Totality

(the Thing-Itself and its Infinitely marked being in the World,

the Thing-Itself and that which is NOT the Thing-Itself):

the Critical Transmission exposes the multiplicitous nature of Subjectivity

by declaring its own Subjectivity

by Being an Utterance in Opposition

an Utterance itself (a)part

To do this,

the Critic examines the Space of Conveyance

(the momentary being of Subject/Object transmission)

wherein the Self-Reflective and illusory nature of perception 

is made apparent in the unstable marking of the Object:

the Subject’s Being with the Object.

The Critic, however, must function within the Spectacle

the Worldview commodified

wherein Value is imposed on the Subjective experience of the World

The imposition of Value on the Object 

appears as an innate relatedness to the Subject.

So, the Critic, in examining the commodified Space of Conveyance,

is locked in a false opposition;

The dichotomy of Self and Self-related Object cannot offer Negation 

for the Commodity comes-into-being through 

the Subjective determination of Value

The Spectacle disallows Negation 

by locking the Subject and Object 

in an epistemic closure of false Self-Affirmation

(the illusory Will in the World)

So, the Critical Utterance, a manifestation of Will, 

carries with it the inauthenticity, the falseness, of the Spectacle,

the Relative Autonomy of Commodity Culture.

It opposes nothing for, being commodified, its locus remains within the Self,

within the subjective manifestation of the Spectacle

within a Subject-centric realm of affectation

The Critic, then, must liberate the Self and the Critical Utterance 

from the false relatedness of Value,

from the illusory validation of a self-centric worldview,

from the Spectacle's fetishization of the commodified individual.

The Critical Topoi must shift from the Subject, Society, or Spectacle,

from the Object (the Thing-Itself and its Multiplicitous Manifestation),

to Being,

the space of the Subject and the space of its Negation

This Desubjectification transforms the Space of Conveyance 

into a conceptual feedback loop of Negation:

the Negated Subject still marks the Object

(the critic continues to Be with that Object)

and that marking manifests as an Object truly opposed to the Subject

an Object Decommodified, no longer of use, or of Value,

no longer a thing of Spectacle, but a Being in the World,

a world which humanity knows only as a shadow of the Thing-Itself.

The Critical Utterance pierces Illusion with the revealing of Illusion.

It is the judgment which negates judgment, 

the declaration of Will which liberates Will.

I believe this is the nature of the Minimalist Conveyance,

an Object which negates the Subject by offering only the Thing-Itself

but I do not believe it is the only way.

The Critic, in Utterance, functions solely within the moment

(Conveyance is always momentary),

the moment is the Object, its fleetingness insures its Negation.

The Desubjectification of the Critical Utterance 

is not an utter annihilation of Self,

but a suspension of judgment, or Epoché.

The Spectacle, foremost, is an illusion of certainty:

the perpetuation of a belief that things are exactly as they appear.

The Critical Utterance is thus a transmission of instability,

a testament to the fallibility of Subjectivity:

the making manifest of a World which resists ideology,

hand-me-down symbolic orders, and engrained narratives of Self;

the suspension of belief in the Spectacle’s force-fed ontology,

the illusions of time, of space, of language, of sensation,

of philosophic and spiritual pasts and politicized, self-fulfilling, prophesies.

The Critic, in the transmission of the moment, 

reveals the Subject’s illusory nature, 

through the making manifest the innate instability of the Worldview.

The Critic is at war with Illusion,

their only weapon is the declaration of Will, 

the marking of, or being-with, the Object,

to reveal the instability of Subjectivity,

the Critic must Be with the Object in Totality,

they must look into the Abyss of Negation

and they must see it reflecting back:

Only then does Critical Utterance stands truly in Opposition;

Only when the Critic speaks, not from the Self, but from the Totality,

not from the Self-Relatedness of Value

but from outside the world of Commodity, 

from the perspective of the infinite:

Being Desubjectified.