Reading Derrida From The Gutter

Except From 'Macaronic'

The subject is only able to communicate through its own frequency, and despite appearances, one is only able to understand it through his own frequency. Where the two converge (the gap) is where the ectoplasm flows. It's a kind of dance.

Here (in the gap) the ectoplasm takes on any number of shapes, just like when you read something, or have a conversation with someone. The shape of the ectoplasm depends on the subject. This is obviously a very elementary example compared to what is really being discussed here. But when it's something like reading, or having a conversation, there's already a framework in place that gives it some form. We've referred to this before as its syntax. Of course there's ambiguity here, but it's something.

Now when there isn't a framework, when you're a prisoner inside your own frequency trying to escape somewhere else, then you need to create your own syntax, like an actual prisoner might create a code. Sigils offer the beginning for such a syntax -- a syntax of a syntax. The symbols communicate where language fails, and when used properly, they can manifest somewhere else in a sometimes very tangible way. Of course some are able to read them better than others.

One thing is certain, strength of frequency is a measure of proximity.

But just like any gap, one always runs the risk of being consumed by ectoplasm -- or possessed. Nothing stops the users of a such a technique from sliding down this dangerous slope.