> The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far. — H. P. Lovecraft
Edit: Apologies; I forgot that my mind's ear had edited out the first section entirely. Skip it.
But it's starts from nowhere, without context, is this fiction? Opinion? AI rambling? Why should I keep reading?
2) It's written a little "higher" than modern popular young-adult-influenced fiction, mostly in that it sets up tension where the reader shouldn't know what's going on, then resolves it somewhat later, and relies on the reader holding context for a sentence or two for a thought or idea or image to resolve. This used to how books even fifth graders were expected to read were written (i.e. this wouldn't have been regarded as challenging) but extreme preferences for ease-of-reading has driven shifts in fashions (as publishers desperately seek a market in a world where readership is already very low and still declining) and now lots of folks find once-easy works of fiction "hard" (even, and perhaps especially, native speakers) simply due to rarely encountering fiction that's not, as it were, pre-chewed, so not exercising those reading skills.
3) It's written in second-person, which is a bit unusual. (First-person also used to be rare, but has become common because young readers find it easier, and it is now taking over popular fiction—I expect narrative perspectives other than first-person are the next thing that will be regarded as "difficult" by the folks just becoming adults now, and know for a fact that many current teens and tweens are expressing that to teachers, that they find reading narratives in 3rd person difficult and so mostly just... don't read those)
[EDIT] I'm not asserting that 2 or 3 are the reasons you specifically are having trouble with it, but pointing out a couple observations about it that might be reasons someone would have trouble with it. There could be others.
It's kind of fascinating, when I think about it. This artwork does something I've also seen the GenX novelist Douglas Coupland do to striking effect: set up a vicarious mental state, through seemingly tedious narrative, to produce a state of mind which is then played upon for artistic purposes, modulating this state of mind to cause feelings.
Coupland repeatedly does that by setting up thematic points without stating them, and then resolving not the surface details but the theme with a conclusion that targets the theme rather than the surface plot.
The author here plays on the theme of meaninglessness, and then more or less makes a plea for meaningfulness at the end. It's pretty straightforward, except there seem to be a lot of people unable to experience a narrative at all, and so they're looking for 'the answer' and unable to experience the narrative in a human way. (not that you're required to have this particular human experience… but the whole point is to have this described experience, without having it)
Pretty sure anybody who's frustrated by this would have an even harder time with Douglas Coupland's biggest works. This is really direct, theme-wise. If that's not enough to get you onboard (assuming you want to take that ride), there's a problem.
If large numbers of people in the post-LLM world end up unable to decode these sorts of artworks, that's a loss to human nature.