The navel of the dream is its signature

The part which constitutes identity does not in any way need to refer to the whole on whose name the identity can be constituted. In other words, it can be an insignificant part, a non-thematic part, and, importantly, a part that is not entirely visible in its relation to the whole to the recipient of the schema/material, when the material is presented. The location of the part is still within the whole, which is a form of traditionalism that pervades signification, but this is as much determined by a will of the author as by any apparent manifestation of the part. It is a small part, indeed, the smaller the part, the bigger its impact, it seems, as if the small part can so position itself that it can form the linkage and the node in the gaps between the bigger parts. Due primarily to its size, it is a linking component, where things from the other parts pass through in a way that only characterizes its partiality (that when a part of the other component passes through it, another part of it has already left it, the linkage cannot consume the whole of another part completely, and this is the guiding principle of linkages), even among the other parts (which are active). As a side note, I feel this could be, actually, a dangerous position: it can topple the rhizomatic behavior of the more extensive parts, as a ‘rebellious linkage,’ or, it can serve as the linkage that demonstrates that focus should be on the more smaller components of a text/schema, as they provide the links, it is they that provide the meaning of the relation/continuity between the larger components of the text/schema. I am not vouching for the emphasis and importance of the linkage of the schema wholesale over its more ‘fixed’ and active elements (traditionally depicted by enclosures), but rather for the less extensive connections, the seemingly smaller connections, not because they are directly apparent as important, but they have been made so by the authors these days. The composition of the material itself revolves, today, around the ‘signature’ element, not in the sense that the material emanates out of this signature and is composed by a relationship with this signature, but rather that this signature adds an arbitrary sense of continuity between the different components, precisely in the presentation of this schema to the audience, and the signature is also a sign of passage. The emphasis on the signature is not within the text but only in its presentation, and it is a very dominating signature, it is highly emphasized, in the presentation, as the key element that holds the text together. The navel of the dream is a signature. What, then, does the linkage show for the whole, for in the end we must think more of the whole after all? It shows that the whole is composed of gaps, where other elements can come in and form linkages. There are parts, gaps, and only then, the whole, and in this sense, the whole is, paradoxically, not the whole at all. Crucially, the whole cannot be filled by any other ‘active’ element, but must be filled by a linking element, such is the nature of the gaps, i.e., the gaps are narrow, and one cannot overlap the things that compose the whole except through linking elements.