Chess not Chess Strawman Alite October M-orphic Journal Anciliary

https://ia601503.us.archive.org/7/items/ChessNotChessStrawManAlite1/ChessNotChessStrawManAlite%5B1%5D.pdf
The current page on The Drawing Research Network will show they simultaneously published 15 of my articles, also on the Rhizome site onDiscussions you will find these as journals. The double hermeneutic of Trace and Rhizome thus made a dialectical Institutional Critique like that of the agency between Medusa and Narcissus will now be continued in new forums in which I am interested to contrast The relation towards semiotics between Bal and Cronan , the former perceiving semiotics as not a master language, and the latter interested in the relation between tableau and environment in cognitive sciences immersion.
Chess not Chess references Matisse, and the River, painting in which he relates towards the contests for the standard between Michelangelo and Davinci, and in regards to Matisse the idea that pattern has the semiotic value of both signified and signifier. Within this matrix of which likewise Gericault Medusa appears to me the strawman for Caravaggio, in Bals writing, for in that composition the sails of the Medusa invert, as in Deleuzes also quoted topology of morphological arrows. Matisse stated that he was not like Duchamp interested in Chess because he required a fluidity to signs, in his work however he quotes or uses the nominal value of model signs, while then again inventing a pictorial mode that also is “flip flop” (like the sails of the Medusa).
My critique of Bal and Cronan is that the former in ascribing to the idea of keying space and time as respectively heuristic, labyrinthine and monumental / object driven-mimetic;dialectic and recoiling nevertheless loses the value of discourse as underlying ethos pathos and dialectic , discourse of semiotics meaning not chess or sign manipulation but rather the process of inventing signs within their own phenomenology. Cronan for his part while credibly reinvigorating the idea of oscillation to a greater globalism yet retain a nominalist relation to structuring his own critiques as the nominalist critique and in this he misses the value that things cant be put into words because they are already there. Thus I am in the end interested in effectuating affect rather than affecting effect the latter clause the apakoinu dimension of Bal and Cronan.
https://ia601503.us.archive.org/7/items/ChessNotChessStrawManAlite1/ChessNotChessStrawManAlite%5B1%5D.pdf