Siphoning of Substance addresses the degradation of artistic and cultural work when it is reduced to mere “content,” a process critically examined by Susan Sontag in her 1964 essay “Against Interpretation.” Sontag argues that the modern compulsion to interpret and categorize art transforms it from a direct, sensory experience into a shadow world of @meanings, thereby impoverishing its true form. She contends that interpretation often arises from a perceived discrepancy between a text’s original meaning and contemporary expectations, prompting readers or critics to alter the work without acknowledging this transformation. Sontag warns that this approach, driven by historical and social pressures, can become reactionary and stifling—especially when applied broadly through media and technology. She observes that art is often tamed and made manageable by excessive analysis, resulting in a loss of nervousness and vitality that real art evokes. Sontag also critiques the prevailing commercial language that labels creative works as “content,” asserting that this commodification violates the essence of art and culture. Her solution is a renewed focus on form rather than content, encouraging a vocabulary that preserves direct sensory engagement and resists the “siphoning of substance” that accompanies over-interpretation. “Our task is not to find the maximum amount of content in a work of art,” Susan Sontag wrote in 1964. “Our task is to cut back content so that we can see the thing at all.”

Reflections

“When there is communication without need for communication, merely so that someone may earn the social and intellectual prestige of becoming a priest of communication, the quality and communicative value of the message drop like a plummet.” ~ @Norbert Wiener, Cybernetics Pioneer

Contexts

*