He claimed repetition as his medium and his project, but the exact nature of repetition proved elusive. If there were such a thing as perfect repetition it would indicate one of two utterly opposed alternatives. Either there is a perfect liberation from situations, or we are shown, through its gaps and illusory hopes, the uncannily mechanical character of experience. But he saw that this is the wrong question, if only because there is no perfect repetition. Repetition was, he found, an attitude of will, a kind of focus, the point of which was not the identical but the different, an experience of the absolute contingency in each thing. But if this was always true, then repetition was valued merely as an expedient to minimise cognitive overhead.