The Structure of Victoria’s Experience
(A Blog Post That May or May Not Be Happening)
Am I Experiencing This, or Just Formatting It?
I’m writing this post.
But am I?
Or is it writing me?
Is this a real act of introspection, or just another typified performance structured by categorical intuitions, HTML, and shame?
I can feel the experience unfolding—fingers typing, mind circling—but I can also see the formatting. There’s a title. There’s a structure. There are headers, bullet points, and a tone that knows it’s being perceived. Is this thinking, or just a high-functioning illusion of having thought?
Every time I blog, I’m caught between two phenomenological states:
Maybe this isn’t a blog post. Maybe it’s just a series of constraints masquerading as clarity.
Maybe I’m not writing. I’m performing legibility.
I don’t know if this post exists.
But I’m experiencing the posting of it.
And that feels real enough—for now.
I’m writing this post.
But am I?
Or is it writing me?
Is this a real act of introspection, or just another typified performance structured by categorical intuitions, HTML, and shame?
I can feel the experience unfolding—fingers typing, mind circling—but I can also see the formatting. There’s a title. There’s a structure. There are headers, bullet points, and a tone that knows it’s being perceived. Is this thinking, or just a high-functioning illusion of having thought?
Every time I blog, I’m caught between two phenomenological states:
- “I am articulating something.”
- “I am formatting something to look like articulation.”
Maybe this isn’t a blog post. Maybe it’s just a series of constraints masquerading as clarity.
Maybe I’m not writing. I’m performing legibility.
I don’t know if this post exists.
But I’m experiencing the posting of it.
And that feels real enough—for now.
Phenomenology & Posting
Husserl says experience is always experience-of.
There’s no raw “just being.” There’s only directedness: consciousness aiming at an object. A cup. A memory. A mood. A blog post.
So what is this post?
It’s not just a collection of thoughts. It’s not just HTML.
It’s experience-of-blogging-about-experience.
It’s a recursive gesture—trying to point at what it feels like to point.
But that raises a question:
Where is the “I” in this act of writing?
Am I the one forming these sentences, or am I just hosting them—like thoughts passing through a house that isn’t fully furnished?
And what about you, reader?
Where’s this post when you’re reading it?
Is it here, now—alive in your attention? Or is it already over?
Is the post the words on the screen, or the pattern they make in your head?
Phenomenology tries to describe experience from within, but posting throws a glitch in the loop. It’s never just happening. It’s being written, rendered, parsed, clicked. It's public but suspended—waiting for experience to finish it.
So maybe this isn’t a reflection.
Maybe it’s just a trace.
Husserl says experience is always experience-of.
There’s no raw “just being.” There’s only directedness: consciousness aiming at an object. A cup. A memory. A mood. A blog post.
So what is this post?
It’s not just a collection of thoughts. It’s not just HTML.
It’s experience-of-blogging-about-experience.
It’s a recursive gesture—trying to point at what it feels like to point.
But that raises a question:
Where is the “I” in this act of writing?
Am I the one forming these sentences, or am I just hosting them—like thoughts passing through a house that isn’t fully furnished?
And what about you, reader?
Where’s this post when you’re reading it?
Is it here, now—alive in your attention? Or is it already over?
Is the post the words on the screen, or the pattern they make in your head?
Phenomenology tries to describe experience from within, but posting throws a glitch in the loop. It’s never just happening. It’s being written, rendered, parsed, clicked. It's public but suspended—waiting for experience to finish it.
So maybe this isn’t a reflection.
Maybe it’s just a trace.
Wittgenstein & Language Games
“What is the meaning of a blog post?”
Not in the abstract. Not “what is blogness in general?” But this one. Right now. This arrangement of words, this scrolling motion, this little existential emoji of an essay.
Wittgenstein might say: it depends on what we do with it.
The meaning isn’t hidden behind the words—it’s in their use.
So maybe this post means whatever it means to you, right now.
Maybe it’s a performance. A prompt. A page break. A vibe.
But if that’s true—if the post is only meaningful in its context, in the game it’s being used in—then what happens when that context is me?
What if I’m the language game?
What if the way I speak, write, think, and overthink is already rule-bound—already shaped by habits I didn’t invent but now perform like a native tongue?
If I start to doubt the structure of my experience—how it feels, how it moves, how it expresses—am I just doubting a specific mood, or am I calling into question the whole grammar of being Victoria?
At some point, asking “What does this mean?” folds back into “What am I doing when I ask what this means?”
And that’s when things get weird.
Or maybe they were always weird, and language was just pretending to help.
“What is the meaning of a blog post?”
Not in the abstract. Not “what is blogness in general?” But this one. Right now. This arrangement of words, this scrolling motion, this little existential emoji of an essay.
Wittgenstein might say: it depends on what we do with it.
The meaning isn’t hidden behind the words—it’s in their use.
So maybe this post means whatever it means to you, right now.
Maybe it’s a performance. A prompt. A page break. A vibe.
But if that’s true—if the post is only meaningful in its context, in the game it’s being used in—then what happens when that context is me?
What if I’m the language game?
What if the way I speak, write, think, and overthink is already rule-bound—already shaped by habits I didn’t invent but now perform like a native tongue?
If I start to doubt the structure of my experience—how it feels, how it moves, how it expresses—am I just doubting a specific mood, or am I calling into question the whole grammar of being Victoria?
At some point, asking “What does this mean?” folds back into “What am I doing when I ask what this means?”
And that’s when things get weird.
Or maybe they were always weird, and language was just pretending to help.
Aesthetic Theory & Vibes
Am I posting beautifully?
Not just clearly. Not just coherently. I mean: aesthetically. Is the shape of this post doing something beyond its content? Is the formatting part of the feeling?
Is it structured like a thought, or styled like one?
I’m starting to wonder if this post is form without content, or content without stability.
It gestures at ideas, then immediately doubts them. It sets up a frame, then leans out of it. It’s not quite an argument, not quite a diary, not quite a joke. Just a shifting arrangement of moods, references, parentheses, and maybe one too many em dashes.
So… are vibes intentional objects?
Can you intend a vibe, or do you just set the conditions and hope one forms? Do vibes have horizon-structure? Noema? Can we bracket the act of vibing and examine it phenomenologically?
Or is a vibe just what happens when experience loses its anchoring, and you have to improvise a meaning from the shape of the container?
This blog is probably not a work of art.
But it’s also not not a work of art.
It’s somewhere between thought and style, critique and cope.
Which, now that I say it, might be the purest aesthetic form I’ve got.
Am I posting beautifully?
Not just clearly. Not just coherently. I mean: aesthetically. Is the shape of this post doing something beyond its content? Is the formatting part of the feeling?
Is it structured like a thought, or styled like one?
I’m starting to wonder if this post is form without content, or content without stability.
It gestures at ideas, then immediately doubts them. It sets up a frame, then leans out of it. It’s not quite an argument, not quite a diary, not quite a joke. Just a shifting arrangement of moods, references, parentheses, and maybe one too many em dashes.
So… are vibes intentional objects?
Can you intend a vibe, or do you just set the conditions and hope one forms? Do vibes have horizon-structure? Noema? Can we bracket the act of vibing and examine it phenomenologically?
Or is a vibe just what happens when experience loses its anchoring, and you have to improvise a meaning from the shape of the container?
This blog is probably not a work of art.
But it’s also not not a work of art.
It’s somewhere between thought and style, critique and cope.
Which, now that I say it, might be the purest aesthetic form I’ve got.
Wrap-Up: Honestly, I’m Not Sure This Post Exists
I don’t know if this post has a thesis.
I don’t know if it has meaning.
I don’t even know if it happened, exactly—at least not in the way posts are supposed to happen, with argument, progression, closure.
But I’m still experiencing it.
And maybe that’s all that matters.
Or maybe nothing matters.
Depending on how you parse the CSS.
There’s no final insight here. Just a moment of awareness suspended in slightly too much formatting. A gesture. A rendering. A self folded into its own display logic.
If this is a blog post, it’s the kind that might disappear when you stop looking at it.
But while you’re here—while I’m here—it’s real enough.
For now.
I think these recommended readings exist?
[1] Edmund Husserl, Ideas I: General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology Where experience becomes structured intention. Abstract, dense, but foundational—like reading the user manual for consciousness.
[2] Ludwig Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations A masterclass in questioning meaning from the inside out. “What is the meaning of a word?” becomes “What is the structure of a life?”
[3] Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Phenomenology of Perception Beautiful and strange. If you’ve ever doubted where your hand ends and the world begins, this one’s for you.
[4] Brian Massumi, Parables for the Virtual On affect, sensation, and the weird ways vibes move through systems. A post-structuralist moodboard with footnotes.
[5] Jenny Odell, How to Do Nothing Not technically phenomenology, but deeply attuned to the experience of experience—especially in structured, surveilled digital space. Also sorry no link, I only have a physical copy and cannot find a digital one anywhere.
I don’t know if this post has a thesis.
I don’t know if it has meaning.
I don’t even know if it happened, exactly—at least not in the way posts are supposed to happen, with argument, progression, closure.
But I’m still experiencing it.
And maybe that’s all that matters.
Or maybe nothing matters.
Depending on how you parse the CSS.
There’s no final insight here. Just a moment of awareness suspended in slightly too much formatting. A gesture. A rendering. A self folded into its own display logic.
If this is a blog post, it’s the kind that might disappear when you stop looking at it.
But while you’re here—while I’m here—it’s real enough.
For now.
I think these recommended readings exist?
[1] Edmund Husserl, Ideas I: General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology Where experience becomes structured intention. Abstract, dense, but foundational—like reading the user manual for consciousness.
[2] Ludwig Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations A masterclass in questioning meaning from the inside out. “What is the meaning of a word?” becomes “What is the structure of a life?”
[3] Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Phenomenology of Perception Beautiful and strange. If you’ve ever doubted where your hand ends and the world begins, this one’s for you.
[4] Brian Massumi, Parables for the Virtual On affect, sensation, and the weird ways vibes move through systems. A post-structuralist moodboard with footnotes.
[5] Jenny Odell, How to Do Nothing Not technically phenomenology, but deeply attuned to the experience of experience—especially in structured, surveilled digital space. Also sorry no link, I only have a physical copy and cannot find a digital one anywhere.
Comments
Post a Comment