But if the saleslady means what she says-and since you have gone through any number of such styles in the past- then it must follow that the other articles in the past were also you and are no longer. How can that be? It could only be because some sort of consumption takes place. The nought which is you has devoured the style and been sustained for a while as a non-you until the style is emptied out by the noughting self.
The passage reflects on the fluidity of identity and existence through the lens of consumption and style. The saleslady's comments suggest that if past styles were once part of the self, they can no longer define that self, indicating a transformation over time. This raises a philosophical question: what does it mean for one’s identity to evolve when external influences, like fashion, are consumed and subsequently discarded?
Moreover, it touches on...
