“We cannot simply be ‘open to contingency’, because our openness, and consequently our modes of interaction, are determined by our capacities. We can only be open to contingency within certain specific limits that we can afford. If the contingent expression of materiality replaces these given affordable possibilities with other possibilities or ceases such possibilities altogether, our so-called sensible openness will begin to negatively deteriorate. Accordingly, what we need is a twisted type of interaction with contingent materials (whether in art or writing) that is built on the formidable ascesis of closure. In this case, rather than seeking openness toward the contingent outside through affordable modes of interaction, the work of art strives to embrace the twisted logic of capacity and rigorous closure itself as precisely the playground of contingency.”