Oblomov is lying down. The sofa occupies Ivan Gontcharov's narrative, published in 1859, as much as the character himself. This sofa is more than just a scenic prop: it is a narrative device and a symbolic body. The novel satirizes a Russian aristocracy paralyzed between desire and inertia and gave rise to the term “Oblomovism”: a force that devours initiative, suspends decision, dissolves action in the interval. The author knew the texture of this paralysis well. A civil servant for years, Gontcharov lived immersed in the labyrinth of the tsarist administration, where time dissipated in opinions, memoranda and signatures in triplicate. The novel inherits this rhythm: it transforms administrative slowness into a literary organism, it embodies formalism through the character's immobility.
Between the sofa and the secretariat, the national allegory becomes palpable: a Russia that oscillates between Stolz's pragmatic energy and Oblomovian stagnation. Stolz, son of a German father and a Russian mother, is a figure of progress and rationalization. Gontcharov constructs him as the protagonist's foil: Germanic rigor combined with Russian sensitivity, discipline and initiative contrasting with aristocratic indolence. While Oblomov remains motionless, dissolved in domestic comfort and social inheritance, Stolz travels, undertakes, organizes, embodies the impulse of a modernity that was beginning to insinuate itself into imperial Russia. If Oblomov is a body surrendered to the couch, Stolz is a body converted into a locomotive. Literary critics at the time accused Gontcharov of having created a rigid figure, almost a propaganda of progress, but this schematization fulfills the symbolic function: it dramatizes the indecision of a nation suspended between modernization and structural backwardness.
Oblomov is simultaneously character and diagnosis. Gontcharov realized that the boredom of a social class could become a symptom of a nation. The infinite indecision, the refusal to get out of bed, the detail of the slipper that never reaches the foot, expose the aristocracy as a sick body politic. Satire entertains and cuts at the same time, revealing the bankruptcy of a social order.
It is from this historical figure that this text opens, but not only. To think about boredom in its contemporary mutations, it was necessary to summon Buglomov, an apocryphal clone, an avatar invented from the fusion between Oblomov and the bug. Buglomov speaks like a digital shadow of the Russian hero, he doesn't quote but fails, he stumbles over his sentences, he stutters like a system in crash. If Oblomov embodied the domestic and aristocratic boredom of the 19th century, Buglomov translates the same suspension into the algorithmic era: a specter that sabotages conclusions, interrupts reasoning and repeats sentences until exhaustion. Throughout these pages, his interventions appear as ironic echoes, manufactured on purpose, practicing an artistic appropriation that edits the interval and publishes boredom as a shared experience.
Buglomov: «I am the beta version of a tired man. If there is an error, report it to the couch.»
Margaret Talbot's reading in the New Yorker (August 20, 2020) served as a contemporary detonator. Talbot recovers the expression attributed to Tolstoy, “a desire of desires”, to think about boredom as a modern condition: the experience of starting without ever starting. The 2020 pandemic did not inaugurate the problem, but functioned as a laboratory episode of global suspension: repeated days, amplified monotony, attention in a state of fragility. Boredom appeared as a signal, the emotional equivalent of pain, calling for reorientation.
Talbot also shows how leisure, free from subsistence work, generated temporal voids in which meaning was not immediately inscribed. The excess of fragile entertainment multiplied expectations that dissolved into frustration. In cities in 2020, fragmented attention required dealing with signals, alarms, calendars, rules and endless Zooms. Adam Phillips, in On Kissing, Tickling and Being Bored (1993), described boredom as “suspended animation”: a movement that begins without being fulfilled, a desire that continues into the desire to desire. James Danckert and John Eastwood, in Out of My Skull: The Psychology of Boredom (2020), characterized it as a cognitive failure, a short circuit of attention close to the “tip of the tongue” sensation.
This is where the notion of suspension gains importance. Suspension is the state in which the action is interrupted before it is completed, a threshold where nothing is concluded but everything remains latent. Suspending is holding time in the middle: not advancing or retreating, but prolonging the interval. In romance, it is the postponed gesture that never comes to fruition. In digital, it is the infinite scroll that promises newness and always returns you to the same emptiness. Suspension is the mechanism that captures the gesture at a time when it has not yet been made, transforming it into thick, repetitive, almost editorial material.
Buglomov: «Queued wishes: system overloaded, please wait.»
Oblomov's sofa, the pandemic suspension and the digital feed are organized as variations of the same figure. In the 19th century, immobile aristocracy; in 2020, planetary quarantine; on social media, the algorithmic economy of waiting. They are different editions of the same experience.
Archaeologies of boredom
Oblomov's sofa prolongs a long story, in which boredom was consolidated as a moral, medical and aesthetic category. Gontcharov's character condenses centuries of experiences with suspension: the restlessness of medieval monks, the urban drift of the 19th century, psychiatric diagnosis, pedagogical reports, the art of duration, the digital algorithm. Each era translated the weight of time with its own grammar, and Oblomov, lying down, still murmurs in the center of this polyphony.
Buglomov: «Suspend file? This is infinity requiring permanent updating.»
In the Christian tradition, acedia emerged as an illness of the soul, a tiredness that is not measured in muscles but in time, a lassitude that affects the hermit when the sun stops at its zenith and the afternoon seems to never end. The desert monks, between the 3rd and 5th centuries, figures such as Antony the Great or Evagrius Ponticus, described this state as the “midday demon”: an invisible pressure that eroded their desire to pray and made each hour unbearably long. Gontcharov, a millennium and a half later, offered us a secular equivalent of this experience. In Oblomov's soft body, spiritual suspension becomes literary matter, and what appeared to ascetics as metaphysical torment reappears transmuted into domestic irony: the hero remains lying down, declares that he does nothing, that he is not aware of the actions of others or his own, and settles into this indifference as if he finds a paradoxical peace.
In the urban 19th century, the figure of Baudelaire's flâneur gave shape to modern boredom. Wandering aimlessly, he transformed the city into text and time into poetic delay. This gesture has a parallel in Oblomov: one walks the streets, the other sinks onto the sofa, both publish suspension as a way of life. There is irony in this parallel: two poets of waiting, one writing with steps, the other with immobility.
Buglomov: «Flâneur offline; I delegate it to the algorithm and call it a cultural tour.”
Nineteenth-century medicine and pedagogy gave a scientific and administrative name to suspension. Emil Kraepelin, in his Compendium of Psychiatry (1883), described syndromes of “nervous apathy” and “mental fatigue” linked to the urban rhythm and the pressures of bureaucratic work. Hygienist reports in Paris and Berlin denounced the “danger of boredom” in factories and schools, while Jules Ferry's educational reform in France fragmented curricula to “stimulate attention” and avoid disciplinary stagnation. Suspension became an institutional problem: doctors diagnosed, teachers reorganized, administrators measured unproductive time. Gontcharov knew this machinery well; By creating Oblomov, he transformed his everyday slowness into a national allegory. The comic emerges here from excess of zeal: entire systems mobilized to combat the simple act of yawning.
Buglomov: «Yawn: it's not in the manual, but they've already asked for a form to justify it.»
20th century cinema also inherited this concern and made duration a technique. Andy Warhol's Sleep (1963) spanned five hours of a sleeping body; Empire (1964) stared at the motionless profile of the Empire State Building for eight hours; Wavelength (1967), by Michael Snow, transformed the zoom into a narrative, leading the eye to the moment in which the image crystallizes. The camera does not just record an object: it publishes time itself, extending it to the limit of what is bearable, forcing the viewer to face the viscosity of waiting. What seemed like a failure becomes a method: paralysis becomes an aesthetic form, delay gains density of experience. Gontcharov had anticipated this regime a century earlier, when he gave entire pages to a lying body that indefinitely postpones the gesture of rising. The irony is in the disproportion: entire libraries commenting on a man lying down, as if literature had been summoned to archive, with bureaucratic rigor, nothingness itself.
Buglomov: «Warhol filmed me sleeping? Is it art? What I feel is just an indomitable laziness.”
The aesthetics of suspension also find translations outside the European axis. In Japan, the concept of ma designates the interval, the space between two notes, two gestures or two objects, understood as expressive matter in itself. Time slows down so that this interval becomes visible, drawing attention to the almost nothing that separates one movement from another. In the Zen tradition, satori presents emptiness as revelation: an experience in which suspension is freed from accumulation and offers full presence in the moment. In these cases, suspension asserts itself as a productive resource, a pedagogy of interval, a field in which the incomplete gesture opens up possibilities. Read from this horizon, Oblomov shares the grammar of slowness in a parodic sense: the sofa becomes a scene of delay, comic and persistent, where the unfinished gains literary thickness.
Buglomov: «Zen = sofa without cushions. Empty with method.»
In the 21st century, the dramaturgy of suspension has expanded on a global scale with digital networks. The infinite scroll, designed to eliminate the end of the page, established a continuous flow, without closure or resolution. Platforms like Facebook, Instagram or TikTok have installed a permanent attention regime: the next content is always promised, always to come, always insufficient. Digital psychology describes the process as a reward circuit, small discharges of dopamine that fuel the insistence of the gesture. The device does not fail: it organizes the waiting, produces the experience of the unfinished and multiplies it to the point of delirium. The whole world moves so that millions of users remain suspended in a rhythm of expectation.
Buglomov: «They call it progress; I only see millions queuing for a counter that never opens.”
At the end of this journey, boredom asserts itself as a recurring editing practice. Monks, flâneurs, doctors, filmmakers and programmers become involuntary editors of the same interval, each one putting the stamp of their time on it. The archeology outlined here presents itself as an archive that is constantly being updated: each suspended gesture, each repeated delay, adds another layer to the same editorial board.
Buglomov: «Archived version, never final. Next layer already in buffer.»
Glossary of neighboring affections
Boredom rarely presents itself. It moves in constellations of neighboring states, a galaxy of affects that intersect, reflect and distort each other. Melancholy, fatigue, boredom, laziness and depression creep into Oblomov's sofa like guests who arrive without invitation and remain in orbit, blurring boundaries and sharing the same space.
Buglomov: «Guest list: always “absent present.”»
Melancholy carries with it the aura of depth. From Hippocratic medicine, which attributed it to excess black bile, to romantic literature that elevated it to the mark of genius and style, it has always been interpreted as a plunge of consciousness, pain that is written, thought that feeds on the abyss itself. In Oblomov we find traces of this same descent, but what in others was transformed into creation or tragic vision dissolves in him into drowsiness. The protagonist describes himself lying down, motionless, doing nothing, oblivious to the actions of others and his own, settled into a peace that coincides with indifference. The contrast reveals the core of the satire: where the melancholic sought depth, Oblomovism produces only a smooth surface, the numb comfort of those who prefer to remain still.
Buglomov: «I found the Abyss: my pillow.»
Fatigue sets another rhythm. Chaplin staged it in Modern Times (1936), with the body appropriated by the gear, each gesture absorbed by the cadence of the factory. Fatigue consumes energy to the limit, exhausting the worker with excessive movement. Oblomov's body, however, does not waste away, but is swallowed by the sofa, as if the energy had been fired before it could even circulate. Between the repetition of the machine and the repetition of immobility, a minimal difference opens up that reveals the texture of time. Oblomovism does not show the machine devouring the body, it shows the body devouring time itself and it does so with the serenity of someone who considers the effort to be always exaggerated.
Buglomov: «Energy on strike. Syndicated sofa.»
Boredom manifests itself as mild discomfort, everyday irritation. Nineteenth-century pedagogical reports described students staring out of windows, unable to follow the lesson, and proposed fragmented curricula to “stimulate attention.” Boredom demands escape, seeks movement, demands another place. In Oblomov, this impulse rises and aborts at the same moment: the body rises a little, then gives way soon after, and the flight becomes a postponement. The comedy is in this failed choreography: a rebellion reduced to the weight of a pillow. But there is also a key to cultural reading here: boredom is a driver of latent change, always on the verge of turning into revolt, always held back by a routine that is reimposed.
Buglomov: «Revolution canceled. Reason: excessive scheduling.»
Laziness inhabits another field: that of morals. Sermons, proverbs and moralisms classified it as a vice and regulated it against work ethics. In this context, the postponement weighs heavily with guilt. Oblomovism, on the contrary, transforms delay into an atmosphere and removes its moral gravity. The sofa does not accuse or judge: it welcomes the expansion of time, converts postponement into a lifestyle. The irony is in this gesture: where tradition sees sin, Oblomov discovers a comfortable method of remaining still, almost as if each yawn were absolution. By refusing moral language, laziness in Oblomov reveals itself as aesthetic: not a defect, but a way of inhabiting time.
Buglomov: «Absolve me, O sofa, for I have sinned by omission.»
Depression offers the most stark contrast. The psychiatric tradition, from Emil Kraepelin's Compendium of Psychiatry (1883) to contemporary editions of the DSM, treated it as a clinical entity: a pathology described by symptoms, minimum durations and diagnostic criteria. Medical nosography converted experience into a regulated category, capable of being measured and evaluated. In parallel, cultural history has brought depression closer to melancholy, understanding it as an experience of loss, existential emptiness or prolonged mourning, so often inscribed in literature and philosophy as a mark of depth. Oblomovism shares something of this disconnection, but retains a residue of desire: the hero dreams of traveling, falling in love, renovating his property, and then letting himself fall asleep in the middle of fantasy. This dream surface distinguishes it from absolute emptiness. Oblomov stages a suspended depression: an announced possibility that dissolves into drowsiness. There is something comical about this contrast, a man who imagines great destinies and, in the next moment, loses the battle against the afternoon torpor.
Buglomov: «I dreamed of Paris. I woke up in the same paragraph.»
The sofa is a stage and an observatory: melancholy, fatigue, boredom, laziness and depression converge on it, each affect inscribing a modulation specific to the interval. Together they trace a constellation, a domestic sky where boredom is reflected and gains thickness. Between desire and gesture, the comic and tragic duration of suspension is prolonged, which literature had already registered as if it were tangible matter. This interval, when translated into cultural systems, acquires an editorial body: blank page, involuntary repetition, unexpected silence. The anthropology of the sofa begins precisely here, in the recognition that an apparently passive object organizes ways of being, distributes authority over time, regulates postures and modes of attention. Interior designers discuss it as an element of comfort, urban planners see it as an obstacle to movement, critics accuse it of incubating indolence. The same piece of furniture functions as a device for hospitality, rest or closure, and therefore fuels recurring diatribes about the limits between comfort and immobilization. In Oblomov, this debate appears dramatized: what could be simple rest becomes an allegory of social suspension, and what presents itself as an intimate experience is published as a collective bug, with laughter marking the awareness that we all, to some extent, hesitate before the gesture of getting up from the sofa.
Buglomov: «Glossary closed. Final review scheduled for never.»
Bugs editorial
The bug editorial is a device that exposes the editing infrastructure. Each failure, each interruption, becomes an event: it forces us to stop, to notice the interval, to experience suspended time. The error becomes a dramaturgy of boredom, but also a stage for discreet ironies, where the solemnity of the systems stumbles over its own details.
Buglomov: «Error detected: the page insists on existing.»
In the 17th century, the so-called Wicked Bible (1631) showed how a typographical slip could change destinies. The commandment “Thou shalt commit adultery”, printed by omitting the word not, triggered legal proceedings and censorship that lasted for months. The life of the edition extended beyond the page, fueled by waiting. Boredom emerged in the delay of justice, in the endless debates, in the drag of the religious and political machinery that three missing letters caused to explode. The irony remains intact: a compositional error became an involuntary decree of imperial debauchery, requiring an entire order to mobilize just to return the no to its lost place.
The avant-gardes of the early 20th century transformed failure into a deliberate program. Der Dada (1919–20) forced reading to face overlapping collages and misaligned characters; 391, directed by Picabia, published inverted inscriptions, illegible pages and graphic compositions in convulsions. The magazine staged dishevelment as a waiting choreography: the reader wasted time deciphering, and this expense was converted into an aesthetic experience. The discreet laughter arises from the mismatch between the avant-garde pomp and the triviality of the graphic error, elevated to an artistic manifesto.
Buglomov: «Dishevelry promised revolutions, but only produced tired eyes — I would have achieved the same with a prolonged yawn.»
In the 1960s, Aspen Magazine radicalized this logic. Each issue appeared in “boxes”: vinyls with Cage, Rauschenberg Super-8 films, postcards and folded pamphlets. Many copies arrived incomplete, with missing discs or broken films. This incompleteness functioned as an editorial signature: reading included the anxiety of checking whether the box was complete. The lack became content, and the expectation of absence became an integral part of the experience.
In the following decade, the error became democratized with photocopying. Punk zines and xerox editions multiplied flaws: toner streaks, burnt pages, dark or almost illegible pages. The defective copy was a mark of authenticity, a sign of marginal circulation, and became its own aesthetic. The error, instead of being corrected, was celebrated as a collective signature.
On radio, accidental silence acquired cultural and political density. During the Second World War, BBC failures produced seconds of electrical emptiness that filled homes with anticipation. The interval was full of ghosts: it could be a bombing, encrypted messages or a mere technical collapse. This silence became saturated with narratives. John Cage, in 4'33" (1952), showed how the interval becomes ambient noise; the radio, when it failed, confirmed that the void could be as narrative as the word. The comic emerged from the very seriousness of attention and listening: crowds suspended before a thread of air disconnected in the ether.
Digital contemporary times have multiplied this dramaturgy. The 404 pages have become graphic micro-narratives: Chrome's pixelated dinosaur that proposes a game during a network failure, or mazes designed as design puzzles. Frustration became a game; the void, in interface. The irony lives in the solution itself: the network promises total access, but it is at the moment of failure that it really entertains the user, as if the Internet offered its most universal version of the couch.
Buglomov: «Error 404: I found more meaning in the failure than in ten thousand feeds intact.»
The aesthetics of glitch has taken this principle to the extreme. Rosa Menkman, in The Glitch Moment(um) (2011), explored failure as aesthetic and critical. Broken pixels, corrupted images, screens in chromatic collapse make visible the fragility of digital coding and transform instability into language. In 2015, Menkman founded the Institute for Glitch Aesthetics, a virtual museum that preserves errors as heritage. The glitch publicizes the fragility of the system, exposes the hidden structure of the image and turns waiting into a spectacle.
Buglomov: «Glitch museum? Just call it a crash catalog.”
In video games, bugs have become grounds for collective experimentation. Speedrunners exploit programming flaws to cross walls or multiply objects, converting errors into method and postponement into game. The flaw stops being a defect and becomes the narrative itself.
Buglomov: «The quickest way to win a game is to let go of the controller.»
The bug, in all these versions, stages boredom as a shared experience. It interrupts flows, prints gaps, exposes the failure as infrastructure. Blank pages, incomplete boxes, electrical silences, burned xerox copies, digital glitches, all prolong the same Oblomovian condition: the promise of action suspended in the instant. By transforming failures into editorial material, bugs become prototypes of possible futures, laboratories of postponement and friction. They are small machines for publishing futures: devices that edit reality through its interruption, inscribe failure as a cultural gesture and distribute boredom as a collective inheritance.
Buglomov: «Conclusion interrupted. It's not a fault — it's editorial policy."
Futures Publishing Infrastructures
Publishing Futures designates a system of thought and practices in which publishing is understood as a cultural and political infrastructure. Its scope exceeds traditional editorial design: it involves managing systems, designing transitions, inventing collaborations and rehearsing ways to make public what has not yet found a place. The “public” ceases to be an undifferentiated matter and becomes a field of alterity: a space where differences, frictions and heterogeneous temporalities are shared.
Each editorial form organizes time regimes, distributes attention and establishes ways of life. The weekly magazine educates the reader to live in the rhythm of waiting, with rhythmic intervals that give cadence to the monotony. The administrative form trains the body for forced patience: repeating names, aligning data, prolonging the wait for a validating stamp. The digital platform multiplies notification cycles, keeping users in suspended attention, always on the verge of stimulation and always returned to the break. The handcrafted book inscribes the slowness of the manual process and prolongs the reading experience, cultivating a thick time that is imprinted on the hands. Boredom infiltrates each of these practices: it settles in the cadence of magazines, it lengthens in the queues of bureaucracy, it repeats itself in digital loops, it prints itself in the slowness of binding. The comic manifests itself here in the seriousness with which the trivial is repeated: a bureaucratic stamp or a changed page gain the status of small epics of delay.
Buglomov: «The stamp is the official seal of annoyance.»
Editing, in this framework, expands beyond print. The public transport system, by posting timetables at stations, collectively edits the wait: each delay turns into an urban drama of boredom. Citizen science networks, when publishing data collected in real time, impose observation cadences that are saturated by excess and force us to live with repetition. Transition design labs, by convening communities to imagine energy or climate futures, create protocols and scenarios that remain in a testing state. In these examples, boredom appears as a cultural effect: inscription of a prolonged time, shared experience of delay, interval transformed into public material. The humor here is structural: entire cities experience the anxiety of a bus delay as if it were an apocalyptic sign.
Buglomov: «End of the world = bus 28 eternally late.»
Cultural infrastructures have always shaped the rhythm of experience. In the 19th century, the administrative forms studied by Lisa Gitelman standardized everyday writing: each filled line repeated gestures of discipline, each stamp transformed waiting into a bureaucratic act. Matthew Fuller, in proposing a media ecology, showed how redundancy and failure fuel the vitality of technical systems. Lauren Berlant, when speaking of “affective infrastructures”, highlighted how culture organizes duration regimes, the weekly television episode, the annual subscription cycle, the renewal routine. Boredom permeates all these devices: it settles in the repetitive alignment of the columns of a form, it continues in the waiting line, it reappears in technical redundancies, it prints itself on shared calendars. The irony lurks in the details: an entire society accustomed to living within the narrow space of a form box.
Some contemporary institutions make this dimension explicit. In 2021, the University of Freiburg created a scholarship dedicated to studying nothing. By financing months of research without requiring results, the university attributed value to the unproductive interval and converted the void into public matter. Nothingness acquired institutional status and published itself as form: each day prolonged in “non-production” became an event in itself. The humor of this scene is involuntary: transforming absence into an academic program is perhaps the most sophisticated Oblomovian solution of the century.
Buglomov: «Official CV: extended nap.»
In Brazil, the Moreira Salles Foundation organizes residencies in which artists and thinkers work without the need to present a completed work. The process converts to a file. Delay becomes value, postponement becomes a method, and boredom becomes a presence in the institution. The break, in this context, reveals itself to be an aesthetic and political resource: financed time to experiment, make mistakes and let oneself get lost on unfinished paths.
Buglomov: «Work plan: wasting time with method.»
In Europe, the Jan van Eyck Academie in Maastricht cultivates long residencies where incompleteness and fragmentation are part of the production. Many projects circulate in an open state, in the form of prototypes, conversations or temporary exhibitions. The institution edits temporalities: it offers infrastructures that make unfinished experimentation public and welcomes waiting as a creative gesture. Boredom, in this context, is seen as a fertile extension.
Buglomov: «Unfinished = final product. Eternal beta version.»
Magazines and digital platforms deepen this same logic. The Errata, in Spain, cultivates graphic errors, changed pages and deliberate cuts as an editorial signature. The reader hesitates, gets confused, wastes time, and this friction becomes criticism: the magazine publishes its own experience of boredom. The platform Monoskop, based in Bratislava, brings together incomplete files, poor scans, fragmented documents. The void works as a motor: each gap prolongs the promise of continuity, each absence publishes the interval as an integral part of a living and always unfinished archive. The reader lives with the frustration of not finding “everything” and it is in this void that cultural memory reinscribes itself.
In Lisbon, Stolen Books expands publishing beyond the book as an isolated object. Its long-term residency program integrates artists who work both on paper and in performance, installation or sound, creating editorial ecologies in which the book is just one of the possible inputs. The slow craftsmanship and negotiation with the unfinished transform each publication into a testimony of time lived. By prolonging processes, Stolen Books serves as a Publishing Futures laboratory: more than just printing pages, temporalities are generated, transitions are designed, collaborations are provoked that make a space of otherness public.
Buglomov: «Slow revolution: victory guaranteed by exhaustion.»
The political dimension reveals itself explicitly when boredom is transformed into social energy. May 68 also exploded from daily saturation: students and workers transformed annoyance into revolt. At present, the digital economy converts the same energy into fuel for populisms that exploit anxiety and waiting, offering immediate solutions to audiences tired of delay. The interval thus becomes a field of dispute: an incubator of collective creativity, but also a manipulated resource to organize quick consensuses and easy mobilizations.
Buglomov: «Revolution or populism? Same queue, different tickets.»
Oblomov reappears as a warning. His voice reminds us that suspension includes risk: the break can either incubate fruitfulness or dissolve into apathy. Publishing Futures inhabits precisely this tension: it invents infrastructures that make the interval public and converts boredom into shared cultural architecture.
Buglomov: «Infrastructure completed. Keep postponing.”
Publishing Futures is thus organized as an ecology of failed, slow and unfinished infrastructures. Its strength lies in publishing the interval, editing the delay and giving collective body to boredom. More than resisting acceleration, it proposes to reinvent the rhythms of culture, making hesitation a method, waiting a resource and postponement a policy.
The Infralight Range
Boredom asserts itself as invisible architecture. It moves between saturation and apathy, but its strength is condensed in that minimum interval in which the two touch each other. Infralight, Duchamp's concept, describes this almost nothingness: the heat that still vibrates in the seat just abandoned, the line of light that escapes when the door closes, the cursor that insists on blinking before the word. These are moments of suspension, subtle failures that become the field of publication.
Portuguese literature left intense images from this period, treated as raw material of language. Maria Gabriela Llansol made silence a compositional tool: in books like The Book of Communities (1977) or Um Beijo Dado Mais Tarde (1990), the pages feature interrupted passages, sentences suspended in the middle, blanks that invite the reader to inhabit the pause. Each fragment opens to another drift, prolonging the reading like contained breathing. Herberto Helder inscribed the delay in the body of the poem itself: in A Colher na Boca (1961), Photomaton & Vox (1979) or Os Selos (1997), the repetition sets the word on fire, the images return in successive variations and the cadence expands without final resolution. Both, in different ways, converted the unfinished into a method. Fragment and repetition function as strategies that prolong the moment and give literary consistency to the suspension that takes place between desire and gesture. In Llansol and Helder's writing, as in Oblomov's postponed body, the interval gains visibility and thickness: a full space where literature itself is published.
These experiences are revealed in the practices of Publishing Futures: the blank page that circulates as news, the digital bug that exposes the fragility of the network, the prolonged residence that inscribes delay as a method. These are gestures that publicize the break and distribute boredom as a shared resource.
Buglomov: «Official range manager. Lifetime position.»
The clasp dissolves. The argument stops midway, like someone leaving a sentence suspended. The blank space prolongs what was not said. The essay is suspended as a page yet to be printed.
The intellectual gesture threatens to begin, but is absorbed by the drowsiness; the energy of the idea is no sooner born than it becomes rest, as if thought found its most consequential form in sleep. Oblomov infiltrates at this last moment as a saboteur of the conclusion. The essay is halfway between gesture and refusal, as if the future edition depended on this postponement: publishing the break, making public the very act of not finishing.
Buglomov: «Final in beta. Final version will be postponed.»
The shared task is this: cultivating suspension as a resource, prolonging hesitation until it reveals itself as a cultural gesture, recognizing in boredom the minimum form of a possible future. The essay ends at the exact moment it refuses to end — and in that gesture it affirms the interval as a Publishing Futures program.
References
Baudelaire, C. (1970). Le spleen de Paris: Petits poèmes en prose (1st ed. published in 1869). Gallimard.
Danckert, J., & Eastwood, J. D. (2020). Out of my skull: The psychology of boredom. Harvard University Press.
Duchamp, M. (1964). Notes and projects for the Large Glass. (Posthumous edition).
Fuller, M. (2019). Ecology of media: Understanding new media contexts.
Gitelman, L. (2014). Paper knowledge: Toward a media history of documents. Duke University Press.
Gontcharov, I. (1859). Oblomov (A. Pescada, Trans., 2015 ed.). Chinese ink. (Original published in 1859)
Helder, H. (2009). The steps around (1st ed. 1963). Assírio & Alvim.
Helder, H. (2014). Poemacto (1st ed. 1968). Assírio & Alvim.
Kraepelin, E. (1883). Compendium der Psychiatrie. Abel.
Llansol, M. G. (1979). The book of communities. Water Clock.
Llansol, M. G. (1980). A kiss given later. Water Clock.
Menkman, R. (2011). The Glitch Moment(one). Institute of Network Cultures. Available at http://networkcultures.org/_uploads/NN%234_RosaMenkman.pdf ;Institute of Network Cultures
Phillips, A. (1993). On kissing, tickling, and being bored: Psychoanalytic essays on the unexamined life. Harvard University Press.
Snow, M. (1967). Wavelength [Film]. Mexico.
Talbot, M. (2020, August 20). The trouble with boredom. The New Yorker. https://www.newyorker.com/
Warhol, A. (1963). Sleep [Movie]. USA.
Warhol, A. (1964). Empire [Movie]. USA.