Immediacy style resists the very critical frames that would interpret it

Evidence

The paradox of immediacy is a cultural style that imagines itself unstyled. As such, it nixes many regular frames for interpretation. In the habitual “substance versus style” contrast, for example, ordinary information conveyance detaches from extraordinary bedazzling: “style is understood as emphasis (expressive, affective, or aesthetic) added to the information conveyed. Language expresses and style stresses.” In immediacy, though, the express/stress difference falls away; to express is to stress. Similarly, if style often pins historical context, immediacy’s temporality of instantaneity resists tether. Where stylization palpates the seams of its own appearance, immediacy’s metaphysics of presence chafes against representation. And wherever art slants, immediacy pools, in medium dissolve and ad-lib unformedness. — Anna Kornbluh, Immediacy, or The Style of Too Late…, 30

Categorization

• DEFINE: Names the self-negating structure: immediacy is a style that denies it is a style, which is precisely why naming it takes theoretical work — the category’s entire raison d’être.
• XREF: This is the direct counter to your ‘Antitheory’ sparring: where you worry theory over-codes, she argues theory is the only instrument that can see the anti-style as a style. — connects to: Immediacy rules out both continuity and discontinuity as modes of knowing