/lit/ - Literature

>>19223755
And a final attempt at being concise.
Much like Ortega's point that one does not hunt in order to kill, but kills in order to have hunted, we can say that man does not create technology as something in itself, as an end which will find a new form or species of man. Instead, it is the highest expression of this new man which brings technology to fruition.
Where this is stagnant or fails one may falsely see technology as the cause. howver, like the hunter who does not arrive at the kill the trail may have been simply lost, weather intervened, or there was an incredible act of fate.
To focus on technology alone is to lose sight of the greater laws which bring it to the surface; to starve in the face of new game over what was lost in memory.

>>19192003
A question here is much like that of "Poor, defeated Tocqueville." How does the artist respond to a total defeat? Not only his own, but that of his family, class, nation, and species. Nietzsche responded by waging a total war before the last man, but perhaps only succeeded in being a solitary walker fallen to the Labyrinth. FG Junger suggests wandering into the forest in search of Pan. One may also say that no men have even existed since Holderlin left the world, as a living and permanent memory - our Ajax.
We cannot look to van Gogh as a Promethean figure. He is rather an Epimetheus. The whole history of art wells up in dark and mouldy rooms, abandoned alleys where nothing is left but a vague sepsis and the smell of rot. The total defeat of art is the most distant reflection of Laelaps and the Cadmean fox.
In the tale of Procris is also the great danger of imitation and play. One can only ever find oneself, seduce oneself. And it is here that the whole world appears as nothing but a memory, and our defeat within it.