5. Energy and the Object
5.1. A spiritual code of energy is undeveloped and it remains the task of explorers of the currents of the human soul to develop it collaboratively on the network which defies time and space.
5.1.1. An attempt to begin this has been made in Section 6 below.
5.1.2. Such a code would not construct systems of belief (which was desire’s task), but methods of relation¾coping constructs for the human as suffering agent, as suffering energy, as energy’s code-making object, as the animal who would believe but simply moves, as the animal who by moving believes, who constructs beliefs from the energy of movement.
5.1.2.1. Why wears how’s fashion now. So spirit now constructs how belief is constructed, not beliefs. And even, by the law of mirrors, how how is made. Manuals are never-ending; this is energy’s cold joy. Is the manual on writing manuals the manual? The one behind it all? The code? Can life be so prosaic?
5.1.2.2. I have written the policy on policy and have seen the hide behind a and a eat its noun and its noun verbify.
5.1.3. A spiritual code of energy might be written in the mathematics of language, in letters’ dubious law.
5.1.4. I would like to see vast armies of blind researchers groping in the inner sancta of their souls, building orreries of energy for proud display in the museums of their minds. Where are the objects? What orbits what? Who feels whom? They grope, they are blind, they build … what more do you want in energy’s enkindling kingdom?
5.2. Energy and Time
5.2.1. A philosophical debate should be raging as to whether time is an object or whether it is a form of energy.
5.2.1.1. If an object, it is becoming a simulation, like all objects.
5.2.1.2. If a form of energy, it should be disinterestedly used.
5.2.1.3. It should be raging, but philosophy now has an atomic nose and is on a carbon leash, led by a coat-white man through architected parks.
5.2.1.4. To turn aside to energy¾this would be philosophy’s salvation and time’s seduction.
5.2.2. Our lives are primarily comprised of snapshots of concentrated energy. These snapshots, called memories, plans or hopes, are themselves forms of energy, simulations of the events themselves, which in turn are simulations of the snapshots. They are like magnetic poles, defining and solidifying each other, but unable to unite.
5.2.2.1. Humans dream of themselves becoming photo albums of themselves; then they would be real.
5.2.2.1.1. To look at oneself in a photo¾doesn’t this elevate one’s flesh to truth and justify one’s life?
5.2.2.1.2. To have someone else look at oneself in a photo¾doesn’t this elevate one’s flesh to Truth and apotheosize one’s life?
5.2.2.1.3. To have all this looking occur not just in a photo but an album! This is what lives are made for!
5.2.2.1.3.1. And this manufacture is humanity striving to see energy, to seduce it to coalesce to a point, even for a flicker of a moment.
5.2.2.1.3.1.1. Simulation allows the appearance of this coalescence.
5.2.2.1.3.1.2. Photographs are its visible sign, energy’s incarnation. The event itself, like the object, has divorced itself from energy and is solely an item buried in the soul’s archaeology; while the digging, discovery, classification, mounting and observing process can create energy, the object itself cannot.
5.2.2.1.3.2. The camera is energy’s democratic eye. Even more, the camera of the mind. But most mental cameras are simply capable of taking pictures of other photographs, an orgy of flashing.
5.2.2.2. As the energy of a particular human life begins to dissipate, it appears as a single snapshot at consciousness’ limens. If some strange collector could gather these and form from them a single snapshot, would not God then be resurrected and humanity fulfilled?
5.2.2.2.1. A recommendation I have for such a collector, which I obtained from energy while dreaming, is to paste each photograph he gathers onto the sky until the heavenly canopy is not stuffed with the archaic materials of clouds and stars, but ourselves¾a collage of simulation.
5.2.2.2.2. If he should complete his task and the bowl above earth become an album, we might look up and see God again. But this is not yet a standard methodology.
5.3. An equal amount of energy is created both through the diminishment or disappearance of the object and the increase and appearance of it.
5.3.1. One self-proclaimed lover of energy¾and indeed with some legitimacy to his claims¾a babbler in the heights and observer of circuses, a syphilitic child, no anti-Geist but a messy bless of yes, a sacred guess, loved energy too dirtily, despite his boasts of purity. He was too isolated to justify his love. But I offer you a polished mirror, one not the same size as your desire, but as the world’s. He said, go over, and by this he meant, build a lightless closet so you can imagine you’ve gone over. But I say, go over, and by this I mean, build yourself nothing and go into its light.
5.3.2. If an equal amount of energy is created from the object’s diminishment and increase, why do humans, including even those who spin words that seem to go beyond the human, seek only increase?
5.3.2.1. Not only this, but energy is also created from the imagination of the object’s diminishment and increase.
5.3.2.1.1. Haven’t we only just begun to sense new sources of energy? And aren’t those of great potency in simulation and absence? Isn’t the objectless mirror the purest source and isn’t it the one form we have until now avoided?
5.3.2.1.2. If energy can be created from the simulation of the object, the object loses its historical function, and simulation, even simulation of energy, becomes means and goal.
5.3.2.1.2.1. As much or more energy can be created from object simulation as from the object itself; this is because the object is a finite set, but simulation an infinite set.
5.3.2.1.2.2. As simulation of energy is equivalent to energy in a way that object simulation is not equivalent to the object, while the process to manufacture energy changes, energy remains the same.
5.3.2.2. Isn’t this why the death of God¾the simulated death of a simulated being, the fiction of a fiction, the grandest simulation¾created so much energy?
5.3.2.2.1. Isn’t this why we had to kill Him? To discover new forms of energy¾ the energy of the negative, the energy of the non-existent?
5.3.2.2.1.1. Haven’t we discovered in divine death the vast deposits hidden in iam? What that grand fiction was trying to hide in summit’s fire?
5.3.2.2.1.2. Isn’t our discovery greater than the sum of all discoveries to date? Aren’t all our grand inventions, from the alphabet to the computer to set theory, simply stepping stones in wading pools to the sea of the energy of the non-existent?
5.3.2.2.1.3. Aren’t we orbiting around this thought like scared curious children around a spacecraft, waiting for its door to open? For its articulation, its laws, its commercialization?
5.3.2.2.2. Now what simulation do we raise for future slaying? Art? Money? But rather would we raise daily simulations that we burn¾gods we believe in for a day, then slay on the altar of our needs. This constant virtual slaying is energy’s future.
5.3.3. In this dawning age of energy, I say that only those who use energy efficiently will have anything to say.
5.3.3.1. Efficient energy use means using energy from whatever sources it comes¾regardless of its source. Whether diminishment, loss, transformation, gain, appearance¾each and all can be used. Only the cloistered clown calls for one type.
5.3.3.2. Even waste is energy, thus the efficient energy user uses the waste of others to fuel himself. It is all the same to him; energy, not objects, subjects, desire or suffering, is his love.
5.3.4. In the past regime of desire, power and love were frequently taken as opposites. Perhaps they were. Perhaps power was love’s absence and love power’s, that hope-hypothesis, God, being the strange conjunction of the two. But here, with hypotheses in shreds hanging from tattered clouds and hope a bed of clattering worms on which we dream, in energy’s democratic realm (a democracy so fully instituted it inspires only horror among the sensitive), energy is equally in love, power and the hideous exuberant battle between the two.
5.3.4.1. Is there not more power in power’s struggle to abdicate its power than power on its own?
5.3.4.2. Is not love’s brute attempt to bring everything to sacrifice an energy that could light a megapolis for millennia or more?
5.3.4.3. Energy does not care; energy wants itself.
5.4. The object disappears with sufficient energy. If we immerse ourselves in energy, there is no object. Objectification is a result of perception; if we cleanse the eye of perception, the eye disappears.
5.4.1. Unfortunately, no cleansing agent is available, only those that claim such agency.
5.4.2. We, however, can simulate this agent by means of letters, which contain within them ruses so capricious and ancient they effectively de-objectify the world.
5.5. Humans desire nature and god, but the material available to them to strive to fulfill their desire is other than what they strive for; the more they use this material for their striving, the more they move away from their striving toward the material. To come closest to their desire¾attaining it is impossible¾they must give up on the available material and directly experience their desire. But this direct experience is equally to encounter madness and death. This is the unalterable alienated condition of humanity: to nearly experience one’s desire and die or to strive after one’s desire and lose it. But energy turns all this to love.
5.6. Those who side with objectless energy are always opposed to those who side with object-oriented energy; this is duality’s truth. Those who side with objectless energy are always aligned with those who side with object-oriented energy; this is unity’s truth.
5.7. We shift from desiring something to desiring and in the disappearance of the object, which is nothing other than the fragmented plenitude of objects, energy is the only commodity, the objectless object, the dream of dreams. We must pray to energy, not as we prayed to God, but as we prayed before we heard of God.
5.7.1. The object becomes meaningless and this becoming is what is missed alike by the pompous critics of culture and their vapid contrapuntal others¾the advocates.
5.7.2. Energy de-invests the object of its objectivity and demands (by not demanding) that objects become fluid pulses in its mystic-physic kingdom.
