The Meaning Of Past Simulations

The world is completely a symbol of a symbol of a symbol of a symbol and so on and so on until you get to what we think of as the real (the physical, the so called objective.) Everything is all at once the simulacrum and the past simulations. Sign values are given for each symbol and exchange for another simulation. Money, a symbol, is exchanged for a deed, which is symbolic of a house. The actuality of the value is always determined by the subject. Symbolic exchange of subjections, meeting at an intersection which is our plane of imagined real. Subjective objectivities define how we interpret and interact with the simulacra. Everything is already a sign. “Words are no longer univocal, therefore signifiers slip chaotically over each other.

Some lines he did, others were inserted for the purpose of our meaning. Even the lines Burroughs did write, or so he is believed to have written, are taken from several different works to make a new meaning, a new value of truth and meaning-simulation, infinitely repeating and representing reality (which is already only a simulation.) The reader can only attempt to learn the meaning we attempt to reveal through our simulation of past simulations. The meaning that we create scares the meager body of the simulacra we were simulating, but we continue to embrace this new meaning as our reality: a hyperreal. The meaning has been cut up. Language has been cut up, played with as signs and created into a whole new universe and meaning from its ashes – Language is dead. Meaning is gone, but from the signs comes a new game of reconstructing a new system and continuing to play with it. Reality is no longer real, although this new simulation is realer to the subject than the real. This is really what Massumi means when he says that the simulation is realer than real. The simulacrum no longer represents the real; it has been twisted to symbolize something more real than the real-our

Maps, news stories, all play with representations of truth, reshaping it and reproducing it to hold a new effect and a new meaning. The reader can no longer trust what I say, as a simulation of reality, but can comprehend the idea I set forth as an interaction between myself and you. Every narrator is an unreliable narrator. Every act of understanding and communication is in itself a new simulation of reality. The question doesn’t lie in what to do, but on what effects are produced. The Gulf War may have never happened to those reading about it, as a simulation of the real, but to those who experienced the war and read the articles, a very different re-presentation of reality takes place. Simulation is not and has never been univocal and unieffectus. My subjective understanding inherently builds a new effect when I connect to the simulation. Every simulation interacts different with each subject. Our objective reality is just the summation of these subjections on these interactions. Even they are the