do you know valerie lukyanova, "the real" barbie girl?
being "the real," she is more than her role model, the barbie doll:
in what sense is "the real" more than the doll? it's human, it moves!
granted: valerie's impressive transitioning shows she has achieved her doll/ideal in the flesh, her more than has left the doll behind. but wait, isn't this more than the doll not also, automatically, a less than?
ok, "the real" is truer, but being @ this fullness, it immediately enters a perplexing state of vacancy: nothing can be realer than it. so, "the real" has entered, as it were, the place of the doll before valerie's becoming more than. in a perverse sense "the real" barbie has attained what the doll could only point to. but in doing so, "the real" barbie signals its own void.
g. f. hegel has a telling paragraph in his logic, under the title "being determinate":
in becoming, the being which is one with nothing, and the nothing which is one with being, are only vanishing factors; they are and are not. thus by its inherent contradiction becoming collapses into the unity in which the two elements are absorbed. this result is accordingly being determinate (being there and so). (p. 133)this is no galimatias: "being there and so" is in fact valerie, "the real" barbie. she finally absorbed flesh&bones into what used to be a mere doll/ideal. but things are never static. we should expect a new becoming, i.e., the next more than to come.
meanwhile valerie "the real" barbie is petrified in her own determinate being category. and as such, valerie's more than is no more. she's not unsurpassable by another more than.
but, what more than will be? what realer than "the real" barbie? ):