The Relationship Between Sign Structure and Play

Noncenter[losscenter] By: Omer Zalmanowitz

Response prompt on Jacques Derrida

How to determine something not to exist, or its nonexistence other than the loss of its existence? How to determine history other than being an intermediary between two presents? How to determine nature and culture simultaneously, since opposition exists between both, how to bridge their opposites into a mutual toleration?

Regarding Structure, sign, and play, three elements in various settings; Structure: thinking about structure, structurality of structure, constitution of structure; Play: the play of repetition, and the repetition of play; Sign: Concepts of signs. Take a myth, or a mythology, or a mythopoetic, first, anything can be ad infinitum, and either too long or too brief; regarding the myth itself, its structure can be itself infinite, or too long or too brief, as well as the sign of myth can be infinite or finite, as well as play can be the same. The structure of a myth can be it falling into a template, a draft, a code, a mannerism, a way to work within language, or the fact of their reciprocity. In fact, sign and play can be in that position as well, the codes of language, signs, can be translated from myth to myth, thus being of symbolic value, representing perhaps a face value, or perhaps concrete point from which to proceed hither and thither. The sign supplements, and the sign concurs movement, as play does as well. Play moves as well, play can be transmuted, and play can be amplified, play creates presence and the disruption of presence. These three elements perhaps can befall a great occurrence: they become similar, and the way they become similar is by a remarkably small number of sentences?