Following the reflection in the editorial on the importance of indeterminacy as a thematic and a way to look at intergenerationality in a dynamic fashion, I present the tendency to refuse indeterminacy versus going into it. I present the authors’ critic of the first tendency and I highlight how they implicitly present indeterminacy. I refer to Bergson’s concept of empty form to guide my analysis that aims to making visible some tacit aspects in the authors’ analysis. Then, I go more deeply into the authors’ invisible reasoning by getting inspiration from Goethe’s concept of active absence—I use one of the papers to present the hidden conditions of catalytic process characterizing indeterminacy. I particularly shed light on one of the authors hidden aspect—affectivity as an intermediary form that is made invisible probably because it does not fit with their theoretical framework acting as a screen (putting some dimensions into the shadow). This leads me to delve into how indeterminacy enables cracking the SURFACE—going under the superficial aspect of our life (our tendency to refuse indeterminacy). I also delve into the poetic dimension of indeterminacy and present some general implications of this analysis for theorization.