parody of structuralism.

we live our lives beyond the pleasure principle, in full knowledge of the construed nature of the principles that determine whether something gives us pleasure or not. by and large, this knowledge negates the pleasure it takes as its object. (have you ever experienced an orgasm solely by looking at the monitor that reproduces your brain activity, blotting out all subjectivity?) yet we continue, we follow paths of which we know they were laid out in advance - or at least determined by exterior factors - we fall into recurrent patterns, taking the way with the least resistance (the only possible way to take). yes, we have social lives; but not because we like it. (to like something - such a primitive idea!) the only reward for this way of living (for the moment assuming this problematic notion has an objective reality) (which it does not) is our clairvoyance and cynicism (in which we take no pleasure whatsoever) - we are not led by the illusions that guide the others. when i write these lines, i am fully aware of the apparatus that interpellates me, projects me into the author position, which is retroactively constituted as prediscursive, concealing the fact the origin of these words lies elsewhere - further and further back - "until the notion of origin ceases to be pertinent."

to stare this knowledge in the eye, and to continue living - this is our ambiguous accomplishment.