Of what importance is there in responding to the below text?
Before responding to this question,
Does it simply become a question of imposing, feigning,
I want to make a preliminary remark
or, if possible, discovering a significance not initially visible?
on the completely artificial character of this situation.
Conversely, perhaps the intention alone and its consequent action
I don’t know who’s going to be watching this,
is itself a valid enough candidate for this text’s significance.
but I want to underline rather than efface
our surrounding technical conditions,
with this response’s significance now suspended from critique,
and not feign a “naturality” which doesn’t exist.
it is the content of the response
I’ve already in a way started to respond to your question about deconstruction
and its success as a compliment
because one of the gestures of deconstruction
that remain subject to scrutiny.
is not to naturalize what isn’t natural –
Yet, what are the directions of a successful compliment, as both antagonistic and neutral approaches qualify?
to not assume that what is conditioned by history, institutions, or society is natural.