Rather, it is what dismantles consciousness, what deposes consciousness, it is what consciousness cannot formulate, and even what consciousness forgets in order to constitute it self."(90) Through this notion of now, this now that exists right now and here, so to speak, Lyotard shows that the traditional determinate understanding of art, the understanding via rules to follow, which he characterizes as that understanding that expects certain occurrences after certain occurrences cannot contain the sublime since the sublime exists in the opposite: the possibility of nothingness. Lyotard claims that such a possibility is ensures anxiety, but not only anxiety, it also offers the joy of suspense. This feeling that he calls "contradictory feeling was christened or re-christened by the name of the sublime"(92).
After this quasi-definition of the sublime in the first part of his paper Lyotard goes on to discuss the sublime with reference to a text on rhetoric that was written by Longinus and translated with commentary by Boileau. In this text of rhetoric, which is traditionally practiced with certain techniques, Longinus talks about the sublime, writing that it is "unforgettable, irresistible, and most important, thought-provoking."(94) And trying to find the source of the sublime within the techniques of rhetoric. On this point Lyotard points out that the sublime is a problematic thing to include into a sphere techniques since it is somewhat inexplicable. A problem he points to is that "when it is sublime (the rhetoric), discourse accommodates defects, lack of taste, and formal imperfections."(95) From this line of thought Lyotard goes on to claim "The kind of perfection that can be demanded in the domain of techne isn't necessarily a desirable attribute when it comes to sublime feeling"(95) since "shortcomings in technique are trifling matters if they are the price to be paid for true grandeur.
