Law, in it’s attempt to circumvent the teratological arising out of the divine, actually bridges ontologies, often making a monster of compressed singularities …or at least further problematizes the gap between the general and the singular. The seat of the para- is deep within, at home with, Law. Which also amounts to nomos and unheimlich forming a union. The measure of the uninhabitable and the homeless.
“Law is the name for the establishment of continuity between heterogeneous ontological regimes. Out of the diversity of worlds, it constructs a cosmos without rule; it is, so to speak, the cosmological activation of the multiplicity of worlds. It will surely not be forbidden to name the agent of this activation Korè. Gilles Deleuze was the first to suspect that, in the order of the world, it may well be the little girl or maiden who, insofar as she represents the possibility of a swerve in relation to every image of the law, also represents the possibility of law as such. As opposed to the father, who incessantly proclaims, “Follow my example, I love you, or you will be punished,” and to the mother, who perpetually insists, “Let me take care of it, I love you, I know what is good for you,” the first impulse of the little girl is to burst out laughing. The laughter of little girls, when they turn toward the stony countenance of the law, makes the grotesqueness of law’s solemnity suddenly apparent—not to mention the profound obscenity of the law that such solemnity continually attempts, unsuccessfully,”
Laurent de Sutter, The Kamis of Kapital