PLAN B MAGAZINE

[nopedcomes]

> Love!

Love is either of two kinds: for something or for
everything.

The first kind, what we might call 'romantic' love, is
the bringing-forth of a world assuming the mark of the
non-being of the supplement of the disjunction between
the two.

The second kind, what we might call 'perfect' love, is
the bringing-forth of a world assuming the mark of the
indifference, even to fundamental ontological
difference, of that which anonymously 'calls
non-beings as beings.'

Because the first kind is founded on the non-being of
the supplement of the disjunction between the two, and
the second kind is founded on indifference, even to
fundamental ontological difference, we are right to
think that both kinds <i>are</i> not, though real.

Where and when these two kinds inevitably become
incommensurate, only subjection to the latter offers
gladness, while only subjection to the former 'abolira
le hazard.'

> Sex!

If two bodies each assume the mark of the non-being of
the supplement of the disjunction between the two,
then this supplement can infinitely converge through
them. This is what we might call 'the truth of sex.'

Though sex is something else than its truth, we must
hold onto its truth, that we might encounter our
beloved honestly, in our vulnerability, our finitude,
and contingency, or however, to infinitely converge
upon infinity and freedom together.

> Money!

Representations of 'sex' often make a mockery of sex,
and representations of representations, and so on,
would have it that there is nothing but
representation. We might call these representations
'money.'

Money reifies itself as it encourages the minimal
resistance necessary for its reification. We must not
identify ourselves by it, and this may even mean
democratically, as rights against this or that, and so
on.

> Death!

Because it does not represent absence as absence,
money makes a mockery of death. Money replaces the
endurance of death as a possibility in the being that
is itself for itself only by this endurance: Human
Being.

Death, as a possibility, must be endured as our
supreme challenge. Being toward the end of our being
is a possibility that must be cultivated to the extent
that we refuse it for eternity, where we always will
have been.

> Friends!

Because a relation to our own death is impossible, and
the endurance of our own death as a possibility is not
only our supreme challenge but also how we are
ourselves for ourselves, we must enter into a relation
with our own death by the death of the friend. The
death of the friend also opens us to the alterity that
calls us into question and open us to community.

The disjunction between friends is not supplemented,
and we befriend in the friend the enemy they could
become, so that by friendship we meet our own
isolation, which, precisely, we cannot be isolated to
meet.

> Family!

If 'romantic' love is supplemented disjunction, and
friendship is unsupplemented disjunction, then family
is where disjunction is altogether unclear. Even
where we might be disjunct from family we remain
conjunct as they become the object of desire within
us.

> Home!

Home is where we are always going anyways so that the
question of being-at-home is the question of that
which keeps us homeless.

If being-at-home means the fourfold preservation of
the fourfold: earth, sky, mortals, and the divinity,
then that which keeps us homeless would be something
like a modern city: in its destruction of the earth,
in its concealing of the sky, in its unhope in the
divinity, and in its forgetting of mortality.

In something like a small town, bringing the
presencing of the fourfold into things, that is,
being-at-home, is much more possible. In small town
Midwest for instance, it is more possible to set the
earth free into its own presencing because there is
earth, not garbage. It is more possible to receive
the sky as sky because there is sky, not skyscrapers.
It is more possible to wait for intimations of the
divinity's coming and not mistake its absence because
one can hear its silent call, not the stupid clamor of
traffic. It is more possible to initiate our
mortality because the earth, sky, and the divinity may
presence, and because while in the packed metro one
may know about the certainty of one's mortality, when
at home in this way, one <i>is</i> certain about it.

[jessi]

which love is real: love for something or love for everything ?

both ?

[W]

behold its truth