Oh my God... I have forgotten all of it!

Among the very rough images that I have of Oppermann, this image of the man with his face turned down reflects the best I have of the current Oppermann. I hope that this image in some way informs the collective "intelligence" of the web. Oppermann would disapprove of this on principle.

Many important things were what I meant to say. But in reality I meant to say none of it. For speaking of Oppermann one must abandon the important things one meant to say. He himself has said it:

"I have nothing to say."

This is an homage to absurdism that extends far back before our time. Perhaps it extends to the court cases in France where the individual "defendant" simply refused to participate in the court process of honoring or acknowledging the indictments leveled against him.

It would be unfortunate to note that the destiny of the web may be the destiny of the "indictment" or the "category": all these accusations drive us up against a wall of our own bare life: "where one has nothing to say."

I could point to the turn of phrase "nothing to say," means that he intends to speak on "no-thing-ness," which indeed is rather something to say on some ontological level.

But what, good sir, is any ontological level at which one chooses to speak? Can ontology be described as a plateau of existence: a discourse with a notable history, various figures (Thales, Plato, Aristotle, Lucretius, etc.) All this seems to be an obscuration of the ontological level, as Heidegger points out. It is not that there is anything really better or more pleasurable to speak of than a "Thales" or an "Aristotle," but not in an academic sense. They cannot be academic or "symbolic" or "psychological," rather they are preferred in their sense of intimacy.