An Interview

M: It is very nice to sit with you today.

W: Thank you, it is my pleasure.

M: So I wanted to start by talking about your controversial new single, “Destroy the World” Do you really want to see the world destroyed?

W: Well you have to understand that is just music and I am trying to gain fans and twitter followers. I try to diagnose the zeitgeist and come up with something that will be supported by the people who feel they are voiceless.

M: So you are trying to tap into the market of the disaffected and resolutely negative?

W: When I check the Internet I am struck by how negative people are. There is a lot of arguing and a lot of anger that seems to exist for its own sake. It may be hard to be passionate about something, but people still desire to feel passionate.

M: So you sing about the passion for the destruction of the Earth?

W: Yes precisely. Although this may not be something you truly desire, I would think that it is clearly an image we seek. There is a lot of energy swirling around the idea of an apocalypse, the total destruction of everything we hold dear. We crave this image, although it may not be something we desire to actually transpire, we believe that it would be an interesting thing to dream about. There is a difference between image and reality, now more than ever with the widespread popularity of film, and in a way, it has always been there in the promise of dreams.

M: Have you dreamed of a total apocalypse? Is this something you've seen that you are trying to share?

W: The imagination is a powerful function of the human mind. I believe that we are receding from life and are being swallowed up by the imagination. As an artist, I never really feel present anywhere. If i go see a beautiful vista, in a way, it is wasted on me, because my imagination is always elsewhere. I always see double, that which is in front of me and that which I choose to see. I suppose there are sometimes when me and my imagination are in the same locale, but these moments of ecstasy are rare, though they make life so worthwhile.

M: Is life otherwise not worthwhile to you? I mention this because you sing about the glory that will be had in the end of all times. You seem to present a hopeless point of view, and I am wondering how true it is to your life.

W: There are things I adore about life and other things I could really do without. I am hopelessly bored by eating, but there seem to be no way around this necessity of life. I guess I believe it is easier to be negative and in fact negativity may be more productive than positivity. Negativity is certainly easier. It is easier to condemn something than to posit alternatives and solutions. I think with my song I was just trying to demonstrate that there is a problem. The solution proposed obviously doesn't quite work-- or rather does not work at all, but is a hyperbole to stress the importance of what we have at hand.

M: So are you saying that the problem is political or existential? Is the problem in society or is it a basic feature of life?

W: I wish I could say both. There are those who believe that the paths of history are unavoidable and are determined by the same laws that all existence adheres to. I mean like there are consequences of being a material object. The fact that you cannot disappear at will. This seems obviously true, but I would remind you that in dreams a person can move quite freely without following the rules of matter. Though some dreams are more confining...

M: So do you think the problem is a technical one? Do you believe that new technologies that could let a person teleport could solve the problems you face in this material world?

W: I think so. I could imagine that I would be made happy by some technical solutions to the problem of matter. It seems that the worst thing about the world is the violence. Everyone agrees that this is the worst thing that can happen to you.

M: This is interesting because in your song you present a total violence as the solution to the ills of the world. You propose destroying everything.

W: I feel like this is a solution based in comedy. I hope my song is funny, not in an overt way, but in a devilish, ironic kind of way. In another tact towards answering your questions, I feel like the image of apocalyptic destruction is a way of testing yourself and discovering what is important to you. We like apocalyptic images because through them you can discover who we truly are. When I say who we truly are, I mean the things that necessity drives us to. When we have to make important choices, we can see what we would choose. If the scenario wasn't drawn in full color we might not see our own potential. It can be comforting to think of violent scenarios and see yourself behaving honorably and brave. This image in times of stress could help be the foundation of lesser goods, which in an empty plane, may be all that you get.

M: I don't know what you mean by empty plane, you short of lost me at the end there.

W: I mean that there isn't much to be done in this world. There are a few bodily pleasures, sex and drugs, exercise and repose, but this is not always enough for the mind. You can comfort your body and this will help your mind, but a person needs to think to be happy. There has to be mysteries to solve. I have had the pleasure of changing my mind and thinking in entirely different ways. I guess when I started life, I lived against the image presented to me by television. Television presented what I had to assume was normal human behavior. I really had no other measures. I wanted to live by the same values that I saw. I developed a sense of humor above all things. The comedy lifestyle is quite widespread. Everyone wants to makes light of everything. Is this good or bad, I cannot say. It is interesting being human because our behavior is modified in so many slight ways. All the time we are learning and changing. If you are a person who criticises yourself, you are influencing yourself, but in a way, you are being molded by outside standards. Where did you get the criteria on which you ply your critiques? The world of ideas is quite real. We all share many of the same ideas about how people should behave, and we observe these abstractions in everything we do. As I was saying, some of this is quite naturally developed, flowing from the laws of materials. We are as we are because we are as we are.

M: I'm not sure I follow you. On the one hand you say that we can change and on the other you say we are as we are, which leaves no room to change.

W: Well, I guess I am saying there is a difference between what we are and what we do. I guess there is not really anything that is, but only things that do. It is a basic fact that things maintain their integrity. If something behaves in a particular manner it is likely going to continue to act that way. Now this is true of chemicals, but people do change, though one could say this might be a chemical change. We don't know what a person is made up of. They can contain different nutrients, different chemicals that could lead them to behave in a different manner. It is not the case that the minds has nothing to do with the chemicals that make up a body. Different experiences lead to different chemicals being present in the brain. The brain is the main behavioral organ in the human body. To judge a person by how they behave may limit the ontology of humanity, but in a violent world it is necessary.

M: You seem to be going a long way to rationalize your negative approach. Do you rationalize your insistence on the use of poetry as a lens for the world?

W: Well yes, the arguments on which our whole universe were very broad, but expressed concepts that were limited in space. The first premise on which our civilization was born was “everything is water.” Loaded with this proclamation is the number one. “Everything” is a singular term, but it is a striking concept presented by the multiplicities we know and feel from experience in the world to a single name to refer to it all. It denies the notion of time. Things actually exist one at a time, leading along a path. I privilege the reality of the experience that happens behind the eyes. The objective world certainly exist, but in an outer shell that wraps around the dense nexus of activity that is the human experience. Religion is a dense technology. It was developed using a method similar to science. Religions are rationally constructed. But I'm not rejecting science. It is a better approach, though the method should be turned into itself. The mind would be an excellent machine if harnessed and used for a productive purpose. I am interested in poetics because I have rationalist beliefs in the use of repetition in inducing ecstatic states.

M: Do you really mean ecstatic states? I ask because you have behaved very rationally in this interview. This would lead me to believe you as a moderate.

W: You can't hear what life has to tell you if you are only tuned into the middle frequencies. Or perhaps you can hear just fine-- should sound like a telephone--and the words come across clear. I believe modulating the body through exercise, the mind can tune into different waves of the thought. Everything is unfolding and everyone can see it. Things start making more and more sense. Things that seem to be disparate suddenly connect. You learn to trust yourself and the chaos inside you. There is a knowledge that exists that comes from being born. We know something that can't be expressed in words. It could be that this knowledge is the source of our words. I believe that with words we can alter biological and physical reality. I truly believe that the more you say, within or without, the better you will be. We know what our DNA holds. Our complete being is within every cell in our body. There is not a part of the body that does not know about the whole. I mean “know” in the realest sense. Knowing is embedded as a physical necessity. Everything else is fuel for the fire. A person is a combustion machine. They burn prepared biological agents in order to generate and reinforce concepts. It has been seen that concepts lead the way for reality to follow.

M: This is getting pretty heavy. You seem an urgency to convey the differance between your reality and one you suppose exists. You engage in the world of idea-products, so aren't you getting in the way of people's true knowledge of themselves?

W: Culture is the process that selects what kind of products should be created. I mean particularly, human-products. It is hard to say what someone should do with their life. I believe I live in a way that works for me, given my metabolism and habits of mind. I believe that I can infect others with a piece of my essence through contact, and that my essence will alter their essence, and that my essence is good.

M:I figured you'd be beyond good or evil. Do you claim yourself to be good to counter the feeling I have that you are bad? While your song is conceived with artistry, might it contain a message that has a bad effect on people's essences?

W: Yes I wonder that too. But if my essence can alter others, than of course others can alter me. In a way, recording that song was a way of opening myself up to the world. I am closer now to everything. It is a very positive effect on me. Hopefully we work harmonically and this is good for both me and the limit of everything.

M: So this truly was a crass, negative record as a way to boost yourself?

W: Yes. You must be a person who is envious of others' very clear successes.

M: We don't know how this story ends. It could be that you are weaving your destiny with bad luck.

W: The idea of recording a negative record that reinforces rational boundaries, the separation between the self and the world, seemed to me as a moderate action. I wasn't preaching the joys of having abortions. I do not see this record as a very original idea-product. It is a technical exercise in the crafting of popular rhymes and the setting of music. I do, however, plan to press the boundaries of what can be said in a song and in the type of messages people receive.

M: Do you care to share the direction of this future work?

W: Well I think there should be smaller subjects. I think time frames could be shorter. I guess I have a lot of theoretical work to do. It is difficult to establish the nature of “good,” but this is the goal I am tracing. I am working with mapping the good as an aspect of duration. Good may certainly just be a feeling. I am trying to develop a physics of the consciousness. More and more it seems like I am less a physical presence than an effusion of words. To give priorities to the fountain of language that represents the truth over the experience of flesh which is but a shadow is to make your way through a bushy path.

M: You seem to be very wise. Have you ever considered opening a school?

W: I detect your note of sarcasm, but yes I do consider the experience of teaching. It seems to be a problem with this world that the people with the most innovative ideas don't seem to pass on their knowledge. Maybe they consider it effusisible and inescapable, but I think we could accelerate the production of knowledge if people were to give higher focus on the smaller aspects of being. A teacher can teach more than about books. There was a practice before the invention of books and time went into a fritz. In a certain way I do look forward to the destruction of our inheritance. It is fascinating to consider, but I have certainly been consumed in the recollection of things past. I have a longing for more experience, though I don't know what this would look like. I am still exploring the best way to continue. As you may be able to tell, I am an active process with concepts gliding into consonance and friction with one another. There is something disagreeable with the world. Everything eventually works, but for enjoyment it takes up time. If it weren't for time, everything would be over already and we wouldn't experience anything. To experience something there is a context which is essential to its meaning. This is the main source of complexity of the individual. It is interesting to see the distances the mind can span. I believe teleportation is a possibility because I have experienced similar phenomenon in my mind.

M: It is interesting to see you get carried along. My questions don't seem to be given proper attention to.

W: Well, I understand what you're saying. Though it isn't technically a question, it has the same effect as one. If we were to consider a grammar based solely on the cognitive effect I think we would have a clearer, more aesthetic view. The aesthetic is of essential purpose to how I live my life, but I wonder if it isn't standing for a deeper ideal? To think in terms of intensity of eye movements in another way of expressing duration, which I having been toying with as a key to the good. It is amazing the access we have to the world. We can engage reality in so many different ways. We can sing, we can sleep, read, eat, view, converse. So many different end-points. You may be able to tell that I am a bit ambitious.

M: Yes, this is obvious, but inspiring. What explicitly are some goals you've set for yourself.

W: I hope to slip into death slowly. I would like to take more trips as a pure spirit until I am more fit to be a spirit than a being. I can imagine the course my attention will take. Some see this process and call it Alzheimer's, but I think it is a very positive process that makes death much more approachable. I hope to achieve such a rapport with the shell of existence that we pass effortlessly between one another. I have felt in my life the boundaries between me and the world grow thinner. I know I am on my way to both of these goals. Plus, I'd like a Grammy.

M: I find it fascinating that you on the one hand talking about another world while still clinging to culturally-derived purposes that seem a little hollow.

W: I admired culture as a machine to distribute energy and attention to different beings. I am happy to participate in the front-end of the machine. I think my work is valuable because I draw attention to the fact that culture is all mechanically produced. In this way I honor the substance, which I believe the substance appreciates.

M: Now you're giving the attribute of spirit to non-thinking substances. This seems to contradict earlier expressions you have made.

W: It is important to contradict yourself. If nothing was contested the world would surely end. The more things are contested then the better off we will be. There will be more to experience. This is an ancient view that serves as a foundation of rationality and science. I do consider myself in the modern tradition. If we honor this tradition and follow down its path then we may find ourselves in a new territory. A whole new dimension of time may appear, as I believe it has appeared to me.

M: You seem genuinely optimistic. I guess we have already talked about how this contrasts with your song?

W: I appreciate your insistence on bringing the conversation back to the song. As you may be able to tell my mind is elsewhere. Or rather, I am have had such experience with this song that it has spread itself over a vast domain. It is a forested area with animals lurking, hiding behind trees.

M: Well I am very happy to listen to you. You seem to be an interesting and interested woman. I enjoy spending time with you. What do you think I intend?

W: I am guessing you are asking whether our sexuality is natural or a learned cultural habit. Culture has everything to do with reproduction. We are born of culture. Culture is the real force that programs our behavior. Our parents are just acting out of their roles. So much of the time we interact, we are dealing with ideas. It is very interesting to hear the objects that are lifted in any conversation. This one, for example, has a very interesting power dynamic that is being negotiated. I hope to tell you that I am very pleased with this interview. Your comments may have crossed thresholds of politeness, but you must know that this fact pleases me greatly. I am happy that you insist on criticizing my speech-actions. More can be produced when friction is offered. Everything may be a form of fire. It should be controlled, but this setting has different rules than most conversational contexts. Though I speak theoretically, I believe more in practice, and in the practice of theory. I believe theory cuts us deeper than we know. Concepts have a way of showing up in everything. I realize that I have once again gotten away from the task at hand and am making this interview different from what is typically expected. I suppose most people don't want to be as self-important as me, but I give as I take.

M: You seem to have trouble focusing on a single line of reasoning. You make wide jumps and break off in tangents. Is this somehow essential to your method?

W: Thank you for the question. Yes, my belief in the equality of things leads me to the substitution of objects in my line of reasoning. I see everything as its frequency in my thoughts. I do posit that the mind is greater than system of objects, but only as a layer of complexity inside the greater reality. The life as it appears to the spirit is a symphony. It isn't about the instruments, its about their functions. This may be a minute differentiation, but when investigating the existence of time with a reductive approach, this becomes a foundational concept that, when you learn to see it, appears everywhere. It is a belief that has the power to change the durations of time as they appear to you. This is a great way to let your spirit hear intense music. The modulation of intensities is a good feeling.

M: You could just go on and on all day?

W: Yes. I am choosing not to take your sarcasm as a reproach to my behavior. I do have the confidence in myself. Achieving a successful record is a big part in my decision to come forward as someone who thinks. I don't think I should be ashamed about the reconsideration to afford everything. Situations are constantly changing and I think the change goes in both directions, from ideas to the world and from the world to ideas. One thing that appears as clear is that everything is a song. It is natural that I chose music as the medium on which I placed the most importance. I think the founding belief moving forward is that “it is music”. Music has been a product of practice, but the concept is flexible. I am interested in the movement to change the idea of what constitutes music. People are opening up the emotional range for what music can sound like. There is more and more music that is neither gay nor heavy. It is important to praise things that are indifferent. Developing indifference is the key to living in harmony. It might be a reconsideration of what is harmony in the first place. It is going to be a relative answer. Harmony is to be taken in the light of the sonic backdrop.

M: I guess I am developing a feel for what you're saying. There seems to be something cohesive in your insistence on abstract terms.

W: And you seem consistent too. You're a bit grouchy about going along with my effusions, which you don't let up, nonetheless. You seem to hear what I'm saying without becoming to attached, which I see as a positive quality of yours. Really you are behaving perfectly towards me, though I wouldn't mind if you didn't want to spin the theoretical wheel. This doesn't have to be an interview. It could be a dialogue. Perhaps that is why you are grouchy. You don't understand why I am the subject and you are the object, as you are outside the subject. Perhaps you would like to be an object too?

M: No, I think that would be overstepping the boundaries of this assignment.

W: No really I insist. If I am to take a transformative role in this society, I should begin with transforming the present aspects of my life.

M: Well I don't know where to start. I think everything you're saying is bullshit. I mean I work hard, and I expect to see some benefit. I think I am an extraordinarily simple machine. I mean, I will work for money. I clearly need money to live and I'm doing what it takes. I do what comes best to me. I may have a objective point of view. Maybe that's why I am having a difficulty in responding to you. I don't think you understand that I work differently from you. I don't think I should be changed. If you remove the scaffolding before the building's done, you're going to have workers clinging to the ledges. What am I saying? I don't know, but I think I'm done.

W: You're done speaking or you're done the interview?

M: I think you purposefully misunderstand me. What technique are you employing?

W: Yes, I was engaging in a taunt. What can I say? Taunting is a great deal of fun and gives me pleasure. I should think you enjoy a good taunt, though really you are such a serious man.

M: I suppose I am, but this is an interview and it's about you, unless you wish to hear my angry digressions.

W: I think you said something interesting, as inchoate as it was. It is true that there is little place for money in my view of the world. Perhaps money should be the foundation of my thoughts. In a way it is. I try novel approaches to the world sourced from the monetary value given to the novel and original. I suppose that if i want to be paid for my wisdom it should be something that sheds new light on the universe. We all have access to the ancient wisdom and it seems like these approaches are made obsolete by new technology. What we view as real has been changed through the use of optical illusions. We live in a much larger world that has different values. There may still be use of good and bad as in the ancient tradition, though we have a less austere aesthetic in these days.

M: So how often does the world change? How often should you turn over old ideas? Either it is happening all the time or not at all.

W: I I think that new technologies are the avenue of change. As we develop new functions we should reconsider who it is that we think we are. Revolutions are led by technology, which i think is something that has always been true. The French Revolution was the logical progression of the development of cities. Cities seem may not seem like a technology but there is a great deal of technical knowledge needed to produce a city. There is technique involved in administering a city, doing things like collecting garbage and distributing food. People were in greater communication. There is technique in communication. We saw people with ideas and these ideas had their way.

M: Do you see yourself leading a revolution of sorts?

W: I am using an existing technology in a novel way. Recording and music technology has changed the function of sound in society. Music used to be exquisite. Today it is so pervasive that it does not feel this pressure. Music previously had a high degree of complexity within a relatively short duration. Now I think that it is more complex but over a much longer duration. There are people who listen to music for nearly the whole day through. They are listening to much simpler musics, but of a greater range of style, mood, and intensity. Music in the seventeen hundreds all had the same timbres-- there weren't many more sounds than the violin or the piano. Now we see much more timbres afforded with the invention of the synthesizer. Music today seems to be exploring these timbres and seeing what functions they serve. This is really two different features, quality and function. Music is good so long as it constantly produces differences. I think it would be interesting to meld the former interest in harmony with the new interest in timbre. I think very interesting music could be produced in this manner. But here I am talking about music when I think you are more interested in the poetics of my approach.

M: This is certainly true. I am interested in messages and how they impact lives. Could you speak more about how you take a different approach to propaganda through your art?

W: I do not think that there should be a radically different approach for controlling the messages in music. I think we are refining our ability to tell stories. The main aspect of storytelling I find interesting is the use of time. A completely true story would be unreadably long and the more you are interested in following this path, the longer your story will be. It becomes an infinite task. All stories are imperfect, or perhaps I have trouble in glossing wider themes. I do sometimes get lost in the details. I do not have a mind that works in simultaneity, but rather have my attention focused on one thing at a time, but images do move faster than words. To represent a mental states only in words is reductive. I would be interested in a cinema that made use of internal narratives as well as pictures. I would be happy if there were more movies like Seul. This picture seemed to be the birth of a new genre, though it was hampered by it's dark theme.

M: I'm wondering if I should ask all of my questions until you answer them. Should I insist on these questions until you answer them or should I move on, pretending that I am satisfied by your wandering reason?

W: This question is one you should decide on your own. If you feel that a question is important and deserves redress then you should persist. It seems however that your questions are open invitations for me to respond. It seems that any answer will do. Your motivation is in being able to have me produce a quantity of text to be reproduced by your magazine. My answers all have something of interest in them though they are not largely guided by your promptings. This isn't a criminal investigation-- there is no actions that my response may lead to. For this reason i feel free in responding as I see fit. I could respond more directly to your questions, but I fear that in doing so the force of logic would leave me. If you want to ask a question again I would be pleased to answer it in a different way-- it would be an unusual practice, but this in itself is something I would desire in an ideal interview.

M: Well, then, what do you see as your role in a revolutionary politics?

W: I suppose I would be opposed to a revolution as they have been typically carried out. I see the purpose of the state to be in preventing violence. More could be done and this would be my goal in the purview of politics. There is still a great deal of crime that occurs as the result of poverty, but we seem to be more concerned with the random violence associated with insanity. Terrorism is the sort of insane crime that we seek to stop. It isn't typical to view terrorists as mad, but they seem to me to be unreasonable. I guess I am would say religious fervor is a type of madness, though there is some tolerance given to this particular affliction. The religious tend to offer the excuse that violence is not a part of the practice they espouse, but a record of history accounts a different story.

M: I find it interesting that you attempt to break paradigms of thought but remain normative regarding outside lines of reasoning. Aren't those you term insane attempting to break out of existing logical paradigms, which is something you advocate?

W: Yes, i do believe you have caught me. I support an individuals decision to become mad. There is a difference between making using evidence to support unusual beliefs and choosing an usual belief from default. I think many people classified as mad see the refutation of past theories and outright lying as evidence that nothing is to be believed. When you consider it, much of what we think we know is communicated not through observation, but is reported to us. We rely on the principle that there is a will to express the truth. When people reject this view there is a tendency for their life to come crashing down. As people we are able to do very complex actions. With the phenomenal view of the world that I try on from time to time it becomes very difficult to perform as expected. Taking the view that all creation is a miracle a lot of basic assumptions are overturned and the subject is paralyzed. The higher level assumptions about what society is are not there. I give high value to the phenomenal view and think that it can lead to important revelations about how to move forward with civilization, but it is no way to live a daily life. I find it important to do what is expected of the average American consumer, like watching television, making small talk and posting banal things on the Internet.  

M: Thank you for your time. You win.

W: It has been a pleasure.

Who Are You?

Who are you?

I am a man, I can tell this much. By this I mean there is a piece of meat dangling between my legs. The function, to recreate myself. I have been around forever in one form or another. I don't believe what they say, the lack of fossil records for humans in the past means that there are no records, not that there wasn't humans. Yeah, I am saying I don't believe in evolution, I think humans have been around for as long as the planet has, which is forever. I say this, but I don't entirely believe it. We got our heads wrapped around the clock and we don't understand time. Time might be a really groovy beast. I know because I have experienced other dimensions before. I have been tuned into different wave lengths. Suddenly I don't see the function of the day, I am seeing things geologically. Everything looks different. The things you would observe about a place are flipped on their head. I forget somethings and remember others. Is this a statement about me or about the functions of time? I don't see why I shouldn't be able to remember everything. I bet there will be invented a memory drug that takes you back. I don't know if you can change things, maybe. There are people investing in this kind of pharmaceutical technology. It will change the way we think about life. Life will become something else. We are driven by what we think the good life is. I think the common conception is that the good life involves a lot of travel. I wouldn't argue with this. If I could be doing anything, money no object, I would be living in a hotel, getting high daily, and focusing in on the lives of the people I dream. I dream about a lot of people who are not me. I hope I am answering the question. I start somewhere and go somewhere else. This is what I mean by travelling. I am travelling all the time. My thoughts roam freely. I think I am doing what I want. I would still rather be living in a hotel, or maybe a series of hotels. A bunch of hotels in one city, within walking distance, or maybe I would take a cab. I think you can learn a lot about a person from what they would rather be doing, because you know, it is kind of rare to find someone who is doing exactly what they would like to be doing. For instance, even the hotel thing I been saying is not quite accurate. I have this image in my mind of a man, naked, running through the woods and diving off a cliff into a cool body of water. This is what I think of when I think of the good life. This is what it looks like to me, but I'm not sure I would like to be this guy, because it would involve some unpleasant feelings, I mean an elevated heart rate and maybe soreness in the legs. I mean this is why I would prefer hotels. I guess my image of the good life is the primitive life, the life of Adam, but I'm alone on this one. I think most people would say the life of a celebrity, which has a lot to do with hotels, is the good life. It would be good to get in the consciousness of the times, I mean, I would like to tell people what to think. I think I been thinking for long enough that I could teach a course in being happy while completely unoccupied, but when am I ever unoccupied? I guess I'm a hypocrite. So sue me, I'm a hypocrite. Am I, or do I just have a different vision of myself, one that doesn't match the statistical representation of my daily life? Which me do you want to hear from, the me who I am or the me who I aspire to be? To tell the truth, the me I am is the me I aspire to be. Strictly speaking, just as the me that inhabits this body. What I mean is that my aspirations are a big part of who I am. It's hard to think of myself without thinking of the future. That's where I am going, and that is what I am interested in. I would like this drug that makes you relive the past. I think that actually is what MDMA is, though you have to take a lot to get clear visions. I'm just messing with you, not really. Though when I last took this drug I was visited by waves of memories. I like the word wave. It's easy to forget that everything is a wave. Can I change my answer? I would no longer like to be identified as a man, I would like to identify myself as a wave.

Well, I can ask the question again and you can start all over.

Okay, yes, do that please.

Okay. Who are you?

I am a wave. I am made of the same stuff everything else is. There is a big fabric that extends across the universe and I am a protuberance. Certain patterns have converged and they make up the place I represent. I think an almost better question to ask would be “where am I?” because although I process information in a particular way, the location I inhabit has more to do with my reportage than what makes me up. This is true if you are familiar with people. I admit, I am the type of wave known as a person, plural: people, but I don't know why I explain this. I am treating you a bit like an alien. I am assuming you don't know anything. I guess typically when people ask who someone is, it is typical to reply with a word that refers only to that one specific iteration of person. This specific word is known as a name, but I am sure you know this. You appear to be an adult man, which means that you have years of experience on this planet. I say “this planet” as if there were other planets to belong to, or be from, but as far as we know this is not true. I suppose the odds would have it that there would be another planet, one with people like us, but what are the odds they speak English? I speak English, among other languages. It is the most comfortable for me and I think is a quite effective language. When you hear the things I am saying I am sure that you are thinking of things to say as well. This is an odd process for me because I am not used to speaking uninterrupted for so long. So If you don't mind I would ask you to perhaps ask another question, or preferably-- how about this, who are you?

My name is Miles Jurgen and I am conducting an interview with you. Although you asked me to ask you my first question a second time, it was fully my intention to ask you this question twice, or even more. In fact, “Who are you?” is the only question I intend to ask, repeating it until you are exhausted of answers. Are you satisfied by this response?

Miles, you know what, I am, and the reason is that you seem like an honest guy. I think you're trying something weird and I respect that. It is good to try different things. I don't ever remember reading an interview with one question. I am sorry if I have tainted the purity of your pursuit.

Although you have tainted the purity of my pursuit, I wouldn't say that this sort of thing is outside of my expectations for the process. I figured a question would be put to me. It is, after all, only fair.

Good, good, I'm glad we're on the same page. Is there anything you'd like to ask me?

Yes. Who are you?

Well unlike some people I know, I was born in a place. Upstate New York, a place called Canadanega. It's up near Ithaca. It means the Chosen Spot. Its called that because of the freshwater trout that fills the lake. It's near Ithaca and Geneva, two places associated with the idea of war. See, I'm an ancient warrior. It was what I born to do. I was born to fight. I joined the service for the first Gulf War and did my time. Now I'm having trouble, because in my opinion I shouldn't have to work anymore. I did my time and think that the government I fought for should support me. I'm not really fit for civilian life. I am much too crazy to hold a menial job. Now if you wanted to employ me in a think tank, that would be another story. I am comfortable in tanks. I like the military connotations of this enterprise. I know how to get around in a tank. The thinking part, well you may be able to tell, but I am a versatile thinker. There are many correct answers to any given question. The question is, which answer is the best? The best answer depends on what you're trying to accomplish. Who are you trying to convince and what are you trying to convince them of? In general it is best to be truthful, truthful to yourself, truthful to others, but these two truths may conflict. The truth to you may be my name. My name might be the most truthful way to answer your question, to you. To me, a person is much deeper than their name. Names are given arbitrarily. A name doesn't name a person's qualities. Now, I'm not sure a person has particular qualities. To understand what a person is capable of you need to see them perform in a particular situation. You can tell if someone is a warrior or not depending on how they behave in a situation of war. Did he retreat or did he fight to the death? The person who fights to the death is born to exist as a memory. Its hard to meet a person who would fight to the death, because they did and now they are dead. You may be that person before you're in the situation, but there is no way to know until it happens. I wish I could look at you and know what was going to happen to you in all the stages of your life. By stages I mean scenarios. Life is all stages. Its a drama, the best way to explain it. Surely there is someone watching, someone above us or below us. Or maybe not. Maybe the performers are playing for their own benefaction. But usually there is an audience, though they are part of the performance as well. We would still put on the play even if no one showed up, we rehearsed the thing, and so rarely is it that no one cares. Great thing about this world is that everyone cares. We like to think that everyone is so wrapped up in bureaucratic procedure that you might as well be talking to a forklift, but no, people are alive and want to see life. Really, that is what has gotten me through so many times. I can always depend on the kindness of strangers. That's a line from a play, but it works for me. You know, I go around, tell people my story and ask them for money. Its a rare occasion that I meet someone like you who wants so much patter, but I do it all for the dollar. Life is a game you see, and money are the points. You gotta score points if you want to keep playing. There are interesting ways you can get points and I am trying some of these outside methods. It, for me, panhandling, is the most direct way to play the game. I present a problem and let people help solve it. I interrogate their values and let the figure out how much they are worth--how much their values are worth, how much they, as people, are worth. I figure both sides get something out of the exchange. I, of course, get more, but that is because I am needy. You know, I'm in need. It is an uncomfortable game I'm playing, it really is quite exhausting. I am just walking around all day, looking for good marks. I mean good grades and people who will give me money. Its a particular type of person, though they come in all shapes and sizes. I guess the best mark is someone who looks like they are insane. They should be wary of me, I am after a dangerous killer, by which I mean a desperate guy who has been to war, but they aren't and when they are not I just know they will help me and I don't let them go until they have. It can be uncomfortable to both of us. I'm an unusual panhandler because I have a high target. You can get a bunch of one dollar bills or you can get big scores. Ask and you shall receive. It doesn't happen all that often but it happens enough to merit this approach. I think I'm worth it and my story is worth it and I have corroborating evidence and I think I can pull it off, and guess what, it works. Now, I wish what the government gave me was enough, but it just doesn't comport with my lifestyle. I don't cook myself. Well, I barely cook. I just can't bring myself to do it. I guess I don't know what kind of food I like. Eating is the biggest struggle. I know I have to do it, I just wish there was another way. Well, I seem to have run out of steam.

Who are you?

I guess you caught me in a lie. I'm not who I said I was. I was pretending I was someone I have met. I guess that would make me an actor. Or no, maybe a liar. No, just an actor. We aren't doing anything serious here, right? You're just interested in running your little experiment. You don't need to know who I am. You're just interested in what I might say to answer this question. This isn't a matter of national security, and you're not with the lottery commission. It doesn't matter like that. I suppose it would be best to give a truthful response, but lying fits better with the way I see the world. Who is a person anyway? They seem to me to be inter-replaceable. In many ways, but not quite. I guess anyone could be working in McDonald's, but not anyone could be a college professor. I am a college professor. I teach the Humanities, all of them. Humanities in general. I take a very idiosyncratic approach. Its like philosophy but less specific. Philosophy became something very specialized and the deeper you get into it seems like the less you know. Most people have the wrong idea about Plato. He says one thing and means another, which is something people don't grasp, at least not the first time through. Plato had one sided dialogues, something like what we are engaged in right now. I wish I could answer your question, but it seems like what I really want to do is to talk about Plato and Socrates. It is very tricky business. What they attempt to do, almost always, is to work with definitions. They try to define concepts. Sometimes I don't think that it is philosophy at all, but just an outside form of literature. That is the approach I take. I am more interested in the polite tone Socrates takes than the arguments he makes. You always know where the argument is going to go. Well, not always. It will always be dismissed as incorrect is what I mean. But sometimes even the incorrect definitions are the ones that stick, for instance, the definition of knowledge that is commonly assumed. Who am I? I am a sophist. I believe that truth should not be held as a standard, but only function. I am uninterested in the truth. I only care about what works. Is that sophistry or science? Take your pick. They are quite different concepts. I know that I am not a philosopher, even though I have the tendency to ramble on and am never satisfied by my own answers. Perhaps I am a philosopher. It does seem that I am chasing some sort of elusive dragon that will bring about my demise. What does this mean? I know you didn't ask, but maybe you should. I guess I am commenting still upon your process of repeating the same question. Maybe every question should be repeated until the subject is exhausted. But the worry is that the question will never be exhausted. Perhaps I am unique, in that I am the only subject willing to play this game with you. Is that a good enough answer? You see, you've asked the question enough times that you don't need to ask it anymore. I will continue puzzling this prompt, researching myself, knowing that nothing will ever sate you. Will any answer sate you? It appears to me that people hate questions. I mean, just generally. Most often you will receive a minimal response. This is perhaps untrue, I mean, I can remember people giving responses that go on and on and thinking, what a simple question, and I didn't ask for all this. I wonder now what the point of human communication is anyway. What is the point of this instance of human communication? What am I trying to achieve? Is speech a corollary to action? Are we trying to coordinate some other action to take place? I would definitely think so. I think I am communicating with you in the hope that someone hears my message and will want to dance with me. My hope is that someone will read this and be able to gauge the deep uncertainty I feel and will appropriately dance with me. I want every moment to stand as a question and the response be given with proper ceremony and primordial force. I myself would not know how this is done. What was your question again?

Who are you?

I am a dancer wearing a sash. I am a bull awaiting a ribbon for my horns. I am a sycophant in line for the bathroom. I am a wolf in daylight, recalling the sight of the moon. I am a surge of power that destroys your electronic devices. I am a worm on a hook, wriggling. I am a demi-god demanding sacrifices in exchange for verdant harvests. I am a lizard under a rock in the desert of your mind. I am a libertine, dancing with senoritas, scratching their palms with my middle finger. I am the destroyer of worlds, looking for bad worlds that deserve destroying. Not all will be pitied. Some will be punished. Just as an experiment of course. To see if their behavior changes. There is no evidence that this sort of punishment works. It is not a corrective punishment. It is a harm management. You see this phrase captured something of my imagination. I would never destroy a world, no matter how miserable it was. Would the cosmos be better off without hell? What good would the light be in a world of seeing? We live in a world bathed in darkness. The chiaroscuro is beautiful, the way the two play together. Do I have to prompt you, or is my silence enough?

Who are you?

I am in between jobs right now. I answer your question with a mention of time because over the course of time I have become many different things, many different people. And interestingly enough, I have a pretension of things to come. I can feel the future, and believe I have seen it in my dreams. I don't know whether I should share this with you, what specifically fate has in store for me, but I should let you know that it all has already happened. It is just waiting for the time to become again. Slowly everything is becoming again. In my dreams the past and the future and all of time meet and tell me the truth of all of it. The truth of the whole thing, looked at forward or backwards. Sometimes my dreams affect my daily life. As in I tell people about my dreams, or I think about them in quiet meditation. I don't know how it all works, but it must be more complex then the simple answer given to us by our rulers. They believe in chaos, or the easy god, with very little reverence for the things they know. But why must I always descend into hatred? I speak about the minds of other people, an experience I have very little experience with. It is must more useful if I speak my own mind. But here I run into the problem of saying things you already know. If I assume I know nothing about the thoughts of others I would spend a long time explaining things that are quite basic, though perhaps in a manner you are unaccustomed to. I don't know, what was your question?

Who are you?

I'm a dragonfly.

Who are you?

I'm a swordfish.

Who are you?

I am flowing hot magma.

Who are you?

You see I am trying to get on rhythm with you. I don't know if you prefer long drawn out responses or short terse replies. I guess I could do either, but it should be clear by now that I prefer long-form answers. If I already know the question and know that I can never give an answer that will satisfy you, so there is really no reason for you to even ask the question. Perhaps if you do not fill my silences with your questions you would still get the answers you seek. I am perhaps tiring of this game, but maybe I can try answering you with a different tact, though I don't know, it seems like I have tried everything. Who am I? I appear as a four-limbed creature who possesses his own will. I am able to manipulate your mind with sounds I emit from one of my face-holes. “Who are you?” from me to you, would be an important question to consider in order to give an appropriate response. You seem to be a creature very similar to me. What this means is that there is a hidden side to you. You are experiencing things that would not appear obvious. You have images that you see with your eyes and images that you see with your mind. The things you see with your eyes, how to describe it? What is there? You just know. Your eyes give you knowledge about the state of things that surround you. At the same time, there is a similarity between all things, so you are able to create new things that aren't actually there and it is as if you can see them, as if you can know them. But you know that all the synthetic objects you create with your mind are bracketed and do not necessarily exist. The imagination is a wonderful organ. We can see into the future with this organ. We see into the future by seeing into the past. We can re-see certain events, usually the strangest events. The events that are too similar are lost and we know we cannot remember them but can only imagine them. They are possibilities, not events. You see, when I get thinking for myself, and not assume things that everyone knows, I get rather confused and hung up on the basic facts of existence. I have this problem where think too much about the beginning of things, try to recapture the event of the origin, the origin of eyes, for example, and try to reproduce in myself the feelings that one most have encountered when this technology was first developed. I would think that the first creature with eyes thought that he or she possessed a god-like knowledge. It must have been a tremendous advantage. I have to wonder whether this creature was on of my ancestors or if the gift of vision was given to multiple creatures at the same time. Still, for all of them, it must have felt like a tremendous gift. The difference between seeing and not seeing is a whole world. I know there are people who can't see who are still human, and they get along remarkably well, but I would bet they agree that vision is a marvelous gift. Of course I know that vision developed gradually perhaps, and at first the creature knew some and successive generations of creatures knew more. It makes me wonder if a new form a vision could develop. Perhaps there will be a new organ that will just know, at first just a little and with successive generations more and more. I wonder if logic is that sense. I wonder if it is possible to know the future, if you just try to figure out, based on the past, what is likely to develop. I would think that with an active enough mind that anything could be determined. But what kind of thoughts would need to occur to predict the future? One of the first things you would have to know is the set of number you are dealing with. There are 8 billion people on this planet. If you can figure out what they will do you could figure out the future. I think people will do what ever they can. People are a form of fire and need to be in constant motion. I mean they sleep, but this isn't doing nothing. This is the good life. To dream is good. It is the highest pleasure there is in life. Even dreams of fear can be marvelous. But anyway, the things people do are determined by the objects they have around them to work with. People interact with objects. People are objects too, in some degrees. Back to an earlier point, I said there would have to be a new organ to give us knowledge and I think that the mind is this organ. It has certainly developed over the years. People are having more thoughts than ever. I can tell by looking into the eyes of a cat that the cat is not thinking very often. Wonderful creatures cats are, but they are not the forefront of evolution like people so clearly are. We do have a problem with human evolution in that the most intelligent people are not reproducing more than people with less money. I heard Lucien Freud had thirty children and I think he is doing his part. I just don't understand why millionaires aren't keeping harems. If the human project is going to work they really have to be producing as many children as they can afford. But maybe Bill Gates is a moron and it is good that he doesn't have four-hundred children. I would if I were him and hey, it's possible that I might have hundreds of children. I'm still producing potent semen. I know maybe it is inappropriate to talk about this and I apologize. I told you, first thing I said, I got meat between my legs. I am a man. It is an important part of my identity. It is important as far as you are a man as well and not a woman. If you were a woman, I perhaps would not have identified myself. I would have engaged in subterfuge, because what I'd really be after is producing children with you. I like thinking about reproduction because it gives you the long view of history. I mean I think about the origin of sex. I mean, in the beginning there was a thing and it would double itself. Somewhere along the line it took two things to create a new one. I wonder why this was. Perhaps to make sure that new ones weren't produced too often, but this is an unsatisfactory answer. Bodies that undergo mitosis don't always have overpopulation problems. Maybe sex exists to ensure variation. Variation is the way we move forward. Maybe Gates knows that he has not evolved. He would prefer variation to the propagation of his own traits. I'm not sure. When you really investigate evolution I am not sure it holds up. Really, it is quite an amazing idea, that with the right conditions people like us just become. Become out of nothing. Well there was never nothing. There was always something. This is quite a hard concept to grasp, that there was always something. It doesn't make sense to us, we who at one point did not exist. You got to wonder that, if there has always been something, whether we existed as an prior idea. There are so many ideas of so many different people and I predict they will all occur. I think we will live on this planet for ever. So right now, I am having pretensions-- I can see the people of the future, a different species, looking back on us. I can see them in their future libraries, researching ancient history. What would this species be like? They would just know all sorts of things that we have to find out. To them it would be an art, all the things we do with science. They would long to live in our world. They would think that it was a marvelous time to be alive, overlooking the terror of violence, which, honestly, is fading away at this point. I don't know, did I answer your question?

Less and less every time. Who are you?

Less and less? Please don't offend me. I am doing hard work entertaining you. I am trying to explain who I am and it does require recourse to biology to do this. Evolution is who I am. It is the metaphysics of becoming that pertains to me. I don't know whether our knowledge of the process of becoming means we should use our knowledge or if we should follow our hearts. Maybe Bill Gates can't get it up for anyone but Melinda. I feel that he is just being conventional, and that is just who he is. I must be a true freak to go along with you. You must be a freak to be running such an unconventional interview. I'm feeling proud of us, Miles, we're doing a good job of creating memories. Remember what I said, memories are created by differences. No one can remember things that are conventional, the same. You remember something when something different happened. Speaking of which, what was your question again?

Who are you?

Yes, I'm just joking, I remember your question. I was just going to say that repetition is a form of difference. I had to make that caveat because it is true that we remember things that recur. In my theory of memory, if repetition isn't a form of difference, well the damn thing breaks down, but it makes some sense right? We are looked into a life of repetition. I mean the sun comes up and it goes down. It get hot, it gets cold, it gets hot. At least for us up here, located North. There are some people who believe the earth is shaped like a torus, or a doughnut. This is crazy because we have seen photographs of the Earth taken from beyond the Earth. Still, they say that its apparent roundness is an optical illusion. I, personally, would prefer to live on a doughnut shaped Earth. I think it is more interesting than a sphere, more complicated. But yeah, some things recur, but it's just some, like most things, it happens and are lost. We crave repetition. We live in homes, seeing the same places over and over. As I said, I would prefer to live in hotels where everything would be different. But I'm not answering your question, am I? Am I saying that we are memories, or that we are recurrent entities? I don't know what I mean by recurrent entities, so I must mean that we are memories. Yeah, that's how I got here. I must be saying the same things over again. Have I run out of original way to answer your question? I must be saying things I've already said, though its okay because it is in a different context now. I really do enjoy some things that recur. I'm not sure about my opinion on recurrence. I can't make up my mind, or you know what, maybe it's not a valid category of experience. All this other stuff I have said have been things I have thought about before, its a bunch of stocked quotables, but not really. But this I really have to work my way through. Repetition. Is it even possible? The example I am thinking of is “studying for an exam.” You read the same thing again and again until it has made a strong impression on you. It is unforgettable after you have reread it. I wonder if there is a physical process that matches the spiritual process. I mean, I wonder if it makes the neurons that contain the information swell up in size or something, or load up with charge. I know, neurons are a can of worms, you open it up and they're out, slithering on the floor and you don't want to pick them up because they are slimy, gross and weird, so know you got worms on the floor and you got to tell the kids to watch out for the worms on the floor and not to step on them, and you leave the door open hoping they'll find their way out, but they don't, they just writhe to death, and then they die and they are actually less gross dead so you pick them up and a few got squished under the feet of your children, but you have a vacuum so you decide to vacuum them up, but that was a gross decision and you get rid of your vacuum, and all I'm saying is that is what talking about the brain is like. It might be a useful pursuit some day, but today is not that day, But basically what I was going to say that each neuron is like one word. Does this make sense? It's how I would build a brain, but you know what talking about the brain is like. It's like talking about dead worms, and I, for one, do not want to talk about dead worms. I much rather be talking about the mind. I think there are some technologies we could design for the mind still. For instance, some technology that makes people happy. I think I could build a book that would make people happy, but it would have a lot of instructions and would have to be used like all the time. Yeah I'm talking about writing a new bible. In the future, people will always be revising their own bible. People will write their own instruction manual. Just one of my predictions, but I haven't done too rigorous of a thought-experiment to determine this. I can imagine it, but maybe it is on a television, or whatever device they are using, program and an object of ridicule. I'm just saying I'm planning on writing my own bible and I'm going to use and it an carry it around and it will be nothing like the things I'm saying now, it will be very specifically designed based on test results. It will be precise and to the point. It won't be conversational, but what bible is? I am enjoying this conversation, if that is what you would call it, and I wouldn't, but you're still standing there, and it really makes a difference. I am aware of you and am not behaving as if you were not there. But anyway, I think I am ready to re-answer your question, if you will.

Who are you?

I am the most beautiful woman in history. I have a face that launched a thousand ships. I do what I wish and am not tied down to the conventions and legal boundaries of marriage. I, like I said, do as I wish. Sometimes it is nice to get away. I never knew that I would live so long, and honestly it has been a nice run. Have you guessed my name? Surely you have. I believe I have provided you with enough material to make a positive identification. Next question.

Who are you?

I could answer this question with so many categories, though I may exist at the intersection of all these. These are categories of experience that I share with many others. Perhaps this type of response would be more appropriate if I could answer in the plural, as in we are... We are black people, we are women, we are smokers. I admit that I may be indistinguishable from others that belong to the same categories. I wish I could could answer for myself alone, but the categories of identity don't exist to give me a unique identity. I can only identify myself in a way that thousands of others would be included. Perhaps if I were more schooled in the way people divide themselves I would be able to enumerate enough categories to limit the possibility of existence to me alone. As it is, I'm just not that creative. So I must answer this question in the plural. It feels good to stand together with others. Sometimes I worry that I may be the center of the universe, but when I look at things with the aforementioned perspective I feel less important, which relieves some of the pressure of being. It is hard existing knowing that every moment could be my last. You see I have a condition were I am highly prone to strokes. It could strike at any time and I would simply collapse and die. Still, I choose to be alone, mostly. This is dangerous, because if I were with people it is more likely that in the event that something were to happen to me, I could be given help. But really what help can they give? I should know this, given my condition, but I try to live lightly. If this is the only life I will ever have I want it to be fun. I approach everything like a game. Of course, I live to win. I do okay. Sometimes I don't connect the dots as quickly as I could, but I am capable of synthesizing knowledge and seeing the bigger picture, which is all the glory I need. You win the game by discovering the rules. Once you have the rule book, it becomes much easier. The hard part is that there are an infinite number of rules. But some is still better than none. A lot of people think they have the rules, but they only have an outline. I mean the religious. They think that a single book could provide all the direction one needs in life. It is true that they are referring to a very rich and complicated manual, but they don't work their way up to it. They don't have the analytical tools to make sense of the work. There are principles of light and darkness in everything. I find it easier to simplify things and abstract them. Understanding that everything has a physical quality makes it easier to comprehend and to work with. All language has elements of light and darkness. It is hard to see without both elements present. There exists language that is too heavily one or the other. I find mathematics to be too heavily light and French and German philosophy too heavily dark. It is good training for the eyes, the eyes of the mind I mean, but it is not the conditions one would desire to live in. It's true that I have investigated books, trying to learn what they offer. When I was young it became apparent that life was awfully complex and that being new to the planet I could do with more experience. I don't believe that direct experience is the only good experience. I believe you can almost learn more from virtual experience, like the experience you glean from art, specifically books and films. The truest experience of a piece of art occurs after the first experience. The way the things are assembled resembles memories or recollections. It is the best experience of piece when you know what will happen, just as the recorder of the experience does. This is an example of the ways that I differ from average expectations. I would assume that most people read a book once, drink the juices that come from the thrill of discovery and move on. It is truly a deeper experience when you remember a text. It is so hard to find a good piece of media that I have to explore it as deeply as I can. How does this relate to your question? I believe identity is constituted of memories. I live for memories. I am always trying to create a memorable experience. I try all sorts of different techniques to make moments last. I feel profoundly sad when I notice that I am living in a moment that will be lost. I remember watching the clock, waiting for a casserole to finish cooking and thinking, this small moment of time, so painful to endure, this moment of waiting, it means nothing to me and will surely be forgotten. I can't remember most of my life. I have spent so much time in conversation and remember so little of what is said. I wish I could recall every joke that I have ever laughed at, but when I try to think of these things I can remember nothing. If you asked me for a joke I would be at a loss, though so much of my time is absorbed in jokes. An interesting feature of memory is that it can composite. I spend a lot of time in bed staring at my ceiling fan, but I cannot recall a specific time I stared at this device. Instead, I can imagine just what it looks like and can generally characterize my thoughts while staring. It blurs the line between memory and imagination. It is a fascinating divide. The two shouldn't seem too close, but they are very similar processes. I mean we think of something specific when with think of both these terms. We think of the object of thought and not the process of thought. Processionally, the two types of thought are identical. It is the way they reference the truth that divides them. When we look at the “what”, the two processes look different, but when we look at the “how” they look the same. In the game of capitalism, or life in general, there is an advantage to be given to the person with a different perspective. Difference is marked, not similarity. I would suggest trying out a vision of existence asking the question “how?” instead of “what?” Right? I'm criticizing your question, which I think you repeat to prove its absurdity. “Who” is the “what” in reference to subjects. “How” is a much more open question. It raises causality. “How” always refers to a period of time. “What” is frozen. While “what” may be appropriate to ask a rock, it is an inappropriate question to ask a person. “Who are you?” is a way to ask someones' name or profession and little else. It is a useful question in the game of life, but that is not what you are doing here, is it? I think we a performing a comedy. You have asked me a simple question and are getting a very complex response. I still, for instance, haven't given you my name. In some ways it is more comfortable a question than “how are you?” which generally refers to feelings. Feelings are a way we categorize thought. We have a block of text that runs through our mind and we give it a simple category, though these thoughts may be about a feeling we have. Are feelings are the results of thoughts or are thoughts the results of feeling? This returns us to the absurdity of causality. There doesn't appear to be an order to things. It is all happening at once. Which you must know already. This is why you ask one question, because you know that they all mean the same thing. The all seek a similar response. Is this what I mean? I feel like I am not expressing myself well. I am saying words, but they are not the ones I really think. I mean I think them and that is evident because I expressed them, but I have a feeling for what I was saying, but it was like seeing. You can't convert an image directly into words, and the way I feel about this concept was like seeing. It came in a flash and made itself clear but then was gone. I hope I have said enough to give you an impression of what I meant. Maybe I should repeat again that there is no causality. It is a radical concept that goes against a very common sense view of the world. But there have been small events in my life that have convinced me that this is the case. It would appear generally that things can cause other things, but this is an illusion. In truth, everything is simultaneous. This doesn't appear to make sense, but the key word was truth. The true exists outside of time. We know this. Things that are true are true forever. This is what gives the word force. The light switch is turned off. This is true, but what happens when the light is turned on? The statement is no longer true. Well, it was true at the time. Does this contradict the statement that truth has no relation to time? I don't know, but it still feels right. I don't know what your interest in this argument is, I was just trying to take a different perspective because I think it is useful to try. It can be dangerous, I warn you, but it generates a lifetime of interest. I mean, it is interesting to investigate outside perspectives. It is a way of alleviating boredom. Happiness is a result of activity. I am trying to teach you to be happy, and also convince myself that I am happy. It's not all about you. I may be addressing you and answering your questions, but I speak for myself, at least at this point. There is so much more I would like to say, but I feel exhausted. Do you mind if we stop?

Who are you?

Scott Redding. Do you mind?

Thank you for you co-operation.  

An Interrogation

Q: Who are you?

A: I don't know, I don't know if I am even here.

Q: Please answer the question.

A: I don't know if i can answer the question because i am not sure if i am even here.

Q: This would be a lot easier if you would cooperate. Who are you?

A: Is that a threat?

Q: I see what you are doing and will not respond.

A: I also see what you are doing and will also not respond.

Q: do you propose that we sit in silence?

A: You don't have to go that far, I would just propose that you ask me questions that I can answer. I come from a culture where we do not have self-identity.

Q: That was an appropriate response. Why couldn't you say that the first time?

A: I guess I could answer that question. I guess I assumed you knew who I was.

Q: Why would I ask you a question that I already knew the answer to?

A: Perhaps you wanted verification. We have different sets of assumptions.

Q: I would very much like to hear your assumptions.

A: I assume nothing. I don't even assume that I am here.

Q: So where do you think you are?

A: I don't think I am anywhere.

Q: I think that is impossible. You seem to be of split mind. You say you believe in one thing yet you must, as an ontological necessity, believe in something else.

A: I don't believe in anything.

Q: Yet your capacity to respond to me means you at least have knowledge of words and believe in the a priori definitions.

A I don't understand what you're saying.

Q: I think you do. All bachelors are unmarried. You believe in this.

A If i were to find a self-identified bachelor who happened to be married I would not deny him the identity of bachelorhood.

Q: Even in your mind? I understand not reproaching the said married man, but in your mind he could not belong to both exclusive categories.

A: I would redefine the term bachelor. There is plenty of categories of actions that have yet to be defined.

Q: Are you a bachelor?

A: I don't know.

Q: Why? Because you don't know what a bachelor is or because you don't know if you fit that category?

A: I feel trapped.

Q: Why don't you want to answer the question?

A: I feel trapped.

Q: To be trapped you have to be in a physical location. You clearly seem to know that you are here.

A: Why are you doing this to me?

Q: I am pursuing knowledge. I want to know who you are.

A: Why?

Q: Because I think you are a threat to my existence.

A: Why would you think that?

Q: I think that because despite what you say, I do know that you are here and anyone is potentially a threat to my existence, but in particular, people who don't believe in their own existence are the biggest threats of all.

A: What would you do if I were to tell you I was not a threat to your existence?

Q: I would consider the statement and continue my question in order to verify its veracity.

A: I don't know what to do to avoid your questions. I do not want to be involved in this scenario.

Q: The fact that you are here despite your wishes seem to me to be evidence that you are in fact here and that matter exists and you are something as well. Why won't you tell me who you are?

A: I don't think I am really here.

Q: If you are not really here, then how come you can answer my questions? How could something that wasn't here interact with the environment?

A: It could be the illusion of interaction.

Q: I am willing to stake out that illusions are, in a way, real and exist.

A: I would agree with that statement.

Q: So if you are an illusion, why won't you tell me your illusory name?

A: I happen to be an illusion with out a name.

Q: You have just lied to me. You have been given name before.

A: I can't remember being given a name, not presently.

Q: I see. You problem isn't in giving me answers. You want a particular question to be asked.

A: Of course I want you to ask me a particular question.

Q: why would you say of course? That isn't obvious, and it seems out of line with your previous statements.

A: I might have assumptions you don't. One of the assumptions I had before you started inquiring about me was that you knew as much as i did.

Q: And what is it that you know?

A: There are three things right now. There is you, there are your eyes, there are circles of light.

Q: I understand that you see me. I don't understand the circle of light, they are not present in this room.

A: They are not present in this room, yet i see them.

Q: I think you are imagining these lights. Are you?

A: Maybe I am imagining you and am seeing the lights.

Q: This must not be true. The field of vision presented by actual reality is stronger than the field of vision presented by the imagination. It is not hard to distinguish the imaginary from the real. Perhaps if I were to hit you then you would know that I am real and the lights are imagined.

A: This relates to an earlier question I had. Certainly you are here to hit me. I was just wondering why you didn't immediately. It seems clear to me that your whole existence is about striking me. I wondered why you were asking questions instead of fulfilling your task. If your task was to ask questions, I could have fulfilled your role myself.

Q: But you can strike yourself as well as I could.

A: I suppose I have that capacity as well. Good point. I now no longer understand your purpose of being here.

Q: What is your purpose of being here?

A: I am that-which-is. That-which-is began to be. Being is the nature of that-which-is.

Q: it must be clear that I am that-which-is as well. Clearly I am being, even if you are imagining me.

A: I assume more than I say I assume. I wanted you to identify with me. I assume only what is needed. Necessity is my guide. I try not to be more than I need to.

Q: Right now you need to identify yourself with a name. This is a necessity. We cannot have normal relations until you identify yourself to me.

A: Normal relations are hostile to my nature. Existence itself tends toward the miraculous. Abnormality is the nature of matter. Normality is the crisis existence experiences. If things behaved normally nothingness would exist, but this is absurd, therefore...

Q: It would be appropriate for me to deny the logic of your statement, but in truth i am not interested in engaging you with this argument. What I really want to know is what your name is.

A: I cannot believe that your sole purpose in this investigation of yours is to identify my name. Surely you have a higher purpose. You said yourself that you were investigating me to determine whether I am a threat to your existence.

Q: I am operating from the axiom that anything which does not cooperate with my predetermined line of questioning is a threat to my existence.

A: There are more things than not that would not respond to your line of questioning. A table, for instance, would even more brusquely deny you of an answer.

Q: There is a difference between people and tables. Perhaps I should have said that anyone who does not cooperate in my line of questions is a threat to me.

A: Perhaps If you were to strike me than I would cooperate with your questions, though I would give you knowingly untruthful answers.

Q: Only truthful answers interest me. I ask your name on behalf of a vast informational system that can determine other facts about you. I am merely an emissary for this system.

A: Perhaps you could let me communicate directly with the system. Perhaps after a perusal I could come up with a name that I would find suitable.

Q: The problem with your proposal is that you would decide on an identity that is not your own. This is useless to me. The point of identifying you is to be able to track your future movements.

A: So you're saying you want to trap me.

Q” I want to track you.

A; I assume that you want to track me so that you can find me in the future.

Q: Yes, this is correct.

A: And when you find me you will strike me.

Q: Not necessarily, but perhaps. It depends on what you choose to do with your body.

A: I don't have a body, a body has me.

Q: From my inspection of your being it seems that you have an controlling relationship, or at least a co-habitation of your body.

A: I think that what you say may be truthful. There isn't sufficient evidence to prove your point to be invalid.

Q: So can you tell me what you call the body you co-habitate with?

A: I suppose I could call it Jason.

Q: Do you call your body anything else?

A: I call my body Miranda.

Q: Does your body have any other aliases?

A: I suppose the body I share is called Jefferson.

Q: You're feeding me bullshit.

A: I suppose I am.

Q: What I really want to know is the name your parents gave your body.

A: I don't know this fact.

Q: Why don't you know this?

A: I am trying to imagine parents but I can't. Nothing seems to come to mind.

Q: Are you suffering from amnesia?

A: Yes, I very deeply am suffering from amnesia. In fact, I can remember parents, but the thing is I can remember approximately forty of them. I suppose I had a lot of parents.

Q: This is incorrect information. Biologically, people have two parents.

A: Yes, but I've had approximately forty individual appearing to perform the same functions that parents perform.

Q: A parent is someone who gives birth to you. Are you saying there are forty people who gave birth to a single you?

A: Biologically, only mothers give birth, but that response is unlike the pattern I've established in talking to you.

Q: I can tell then from that uncharacteristic response that you want to tell me the truth. Why are you lying to me?

A: I am lying to you because you will inevitably strike me. There is no way around the violence you intend. To me, it has already occurred. You have violated me and no longer deserve to be told the truth. It is a commandment that you must not give love to those who strike you.

Q: Where did this commandment come from? To me, the opposite commandment is true. Love thou who would strike you.

A: I suppose that could be necessary, but I would have to see the data.

Q: What data could I furnish to you in order to make you answer me truthfully?

A: I would have to see your commandment played out.

Q: Do you want me to strike you and have you discover your love for me?

A: I suppose that would be sufficient, though I would prefer if you didn't strike me. It is too late, to me you have already struck me and I don't love you.

Q: What if you saw me strike myself?

A: I suppose that would be sufficient, though on the other hand it would prove to me that your intention is to strike.

Q: What if i promised you that I would not hit you?

A: Would you allow me to leave, in that case?

Q: No, you are needed to be questioned.

A: If i attempted to leave, then you would strike me?

Q: I would detain you against your will, yes.

A: If i struck you, you would then strike me back?

Q: Yes, if you became violent I would be forced to meet you with similar force. I take then that you have just threatened me. You see you have threatened me and i must inquire about you to make sure that you do not pose a significant threat.

A: I merely was attempting to prove that you were threatening me.

Q: No. You threatened me. I never once supplied a threat to you.

A: By detaining me you have already posed violence against me.

Q: But by your own logic I did not detain you. You are imagining me.

A: But i also imagined that you detained me. Even in imagination you have posed violence against me.

Q: Would it be alright with you if I asked forgiveness?

A: That's really quite touching, I suppose I could forgive you.

Q: I'm sorry I used violence against you. I have no intention of using any further violence against you. If you could supply me with your name I could be make this into a pact.

A: You really are quite charming you know. I suppose most abusers are.

Q: Really, I am quite sorry for what I've done to you.

A: Will you let me leave?

Q: I am afraid I cannot let you leave until you give me your name.

A: Why are you so insistent on this line of questioning? I can supply you with any information but this one thing you ask.

Q: Well, you have already presented yourself as a threat to my existence, and I only need your name so that I may continue to monitor you in case I need to prevent you from causing me harm.

A: I suppose we were destined to be together, me and you.

Q: It is happening right now. So?

A: I am feeling all sorts of things right now. I want to tell you my name, but i am afraid that when you know the answer that you won't continue to speak with me.

Q: So you enjoy my questioning?

A: Oh, very much so.

Q: You do realize that by denying the answer to my question that you are placing yourself at greater risk for violence?

A: I do, but somehow it seems worth it. I think your commandment might be correct after all.

Q: Do you want me to strike you?

A: it seems that you are playing right into my hands.

Q: Is this what you intended from the beginning?

A: My desire is always to bring others into myself. This is the nature of matter.

Q: What other things behave in this way? I don't think you can make that generalization about matter.

A: All matter seeks a way out of itself. The lines of light are lines of flight.

Q: Are you escaping into me?

A: By engaging with you I am entering into your perception, yes.

Q: You know a great way to escape yourself is by giving me your name.

A: I guess I am considering the matter quantitatively. I want to maximize my time in you and supplying an answer to your question would cease this interaction.

Q: What if I were to leave you alone?

A: I would be unhappy at first and then I would see the lights again and be satisfied. I really do enjoy talking to you and hope you won't leave me.

Q: Well, I am very frustrated by your denials and think you need some time to yourself to reassess what is real and what is important.

A: okay.

(Q leaves the room)

A: Okay, well then I guess I am just going to sit here and pretend I am somewhere else. I would like to see what the other galaxies look like. I wonder who lives there and how different their stories are from ours. Surely they have something like Hamlet, it just has to be a universal necessity. I wonder if they have a Bible. I wonder if they know about us, or are at least curious about our existence. I am curious about them, so I bet they are curious about us. On the other hand, life is such an improbable miracle that we could be the one living planet among the infinite. I feel like I am one in infinity. I am doing quite well at this interrogation. I haven't said a single thing that is true. This is a win-lose scenario, a competition between he and I. I caused him to take leave and reconsider his tact. I wonder if he will come back with something different. I suppose he could be monitoring me right now, so it may be in my best interests to silently consider my options, but on the other hand I do my best thinking aloud. I don't suppose I am saying anything I wouldn't want heard; I am, after all, not divulging any of the information he was inquiring after. Perhaps his insistence on my name was just a ruse to draw out information about my reasoning process, which I do think he must find to be impeccable. It is clear that I have a problem with dealing with figures of authority, that is, I do not submit readily to authority. I just keep going on and on, don't I? I don't know whether I should prepare myself for the resumption of the interrogation or if i should distract myself from this unpleasant situation. The truth is I don't know how to prepare myself. It seems that up to this point that i have based my blocks on metaphysical concerns, so if i want to continue in this vein I would do well if i considered the nature of matter. I wonder if it is the nature of matter to consider itself and try to abstract concepts from its own existence. This is an example of the metaphysical preparations I intended to make. I am pleased that i did at least start to do that which I said i should do, though I was interrupted from the process by giving myself praise, but I suppose this is an okay method of reinforcing the concepts that I am trying to base my reasoning from. Geez, it's cold in here, It must be a method of interrogation. They want to make me uncomfortable. I should request a sweater when the man returns. He probably won't give it to me, but it may be worth risking because it is a way of accusing him of violence. I suppose it is important to keep the moral high ground in this situation, but I wish I wasn't saying that aloud, because I assume they are listening to me. They must think I am quite odd to keep talking to myself like this. I would think that this is unusual for a suspect to do, which leads me to believe that they are probably not listening to me, or rather they did not have the intention to listen to me, but they did in fact notice that I was talking and are listening to me. This is good because I like talking and I am taking time away from their ability to plan for the next sequence of interrogation. Looks like everything is coming up Mark. Oh no, I just said my name, and I just confirmed it too. I am such a fool. Well at least I didn't identify my last name, though I gave ground from my position that I didn't have a name. I am really digging myself into a hole here. Maybe I should give up while I am behind and make my concession. No, I must fight. Why must I fight? Can't I see that I am defeated? I will never be capable of the violence that they are capable of. I will lose this fight. Have I already lost. That isn't clear. I suppose that I should stop talking and think silently to myself all these things I am saying. (pause) But for some odd reason I cannot perform this silent calculation. I must be spooked and feel the determination of vocalized speech, because I am still talking. This is a awkward situation. I want to leave. I want to hide under my bed. Please determine that I am not a threat. I am a very good boy who is mostly interested in the nature of reality and not in violence. I suppose I am interested in violence, as the reality of violence is when of the key distinctions between living and dreaming. What am I saying? I am so confused. I fear I am not making sense. Maybe I should pray for guidance. Dear God, give me the strength to avoid answering all questions and to avoid a conviction in the court of law. I am not a terrorist and do not intend to become a terrorist. Please let these scary men release me and forget about me. Please let them determine that I am not a threat. I am not a threat. I just want to have sex with beautiful women. Please let beautiful women meet me and love me and decide to take me home and ply me with kisses tender and sweet and let them have shaved underarms and shaved legs and long flowing hair in an original style that is fresh and youthful and deliver me from evil for thy is the kingdom the power and the glory forever and ever. Amen. Whew, that made me feel better, but perhaps I should have said something about god letting me remain silent, because I notice that I am still talking and this guy isn't back in the room yet. My luck goes from bad to worse. Not even God loves me and he loves everyone, except sharks. I don't know why God lets there be sharks. I am just kidding with myself, sharks are so obviously an ecological necessity.

(Q enters the room)

Q: Okay Mark, are you ready to share with me?

A: No I hate you and will never divulge my secret plan to destroy America.

Q: That's a very serious thing you just said.

A: It was only a joke, I swear, please don't hurt me.

Q: You have changed since we last spoke.

A: I may be losing it a little.

Q: Tell me about your plan to destroy America.

A: It not so much a plan as a metaphysical research platform.

Q: A metaphysical research platform?

A: Yes, but I'm just kidding. I am just saying words now.

Q: I do not take jokes lightly.

A: Is it my problem that you are less than human?

Q: It very much seems to be your problem. It's not my problem.

A: It's my problem that you don't understand human communication? You're just playing. You know that I am not a serious threat. I don't even have a beard.

Q: Beards have nothing to do with this matter.

A: I am still trying to joke with you. I am going on the offensive.

Q: Well I hear you making threats about destroying America. I don't think that is a funny joke.

A: There are many light movies with apocalyptic themes nowadays, get with the times.

Q: You seem much different now.

A: That's what I saying, there is no me.

Q: But I can see you.

A: I suppose I am conceding to you that I am indeed a threat. I am capable of any number of actions. I suppose there is nothing to do but to take away my freedom.

Q: Is that what you want?

A: No, that is not what I want.

Q: Why would you say that if that is not what you want.

A: I just want someone to love.

Q: That does not seem to be pertinent to the topic at hand.

A: It is very pertinent. I am revealing to you my true identity. I am a lover with half a soul, seeking completion by a woman who gets my jokes.

Q: I see.

A: I don't think you do, but I hope you do, but what can I do? Can I do anything for you?

Q: Mark, we need to know your last name.

A: Ah, this again. Well I don't know. I think I may be almost cracked. I think if you keep pushing I will have to eventually answer.

Q: I really don't have the time to play games.

A: What else is there is life but the playing of games? Surely you have time for a game, and particularly for such a fun game as this.

Q: This isn't a game; it's a question of national security.

A: National security is just a game devised to share natural resources.

Q: National security is about preserving lives, not natural resources. It's safety, not economics.

A: I guess I'm just cynical then.

Q: What is your last name?

A: I'm not the person to ask-- maybe try one of my known associates.

Q: None of your associates have ever heard of someone matching your description.

A: This must be because I am actually an extraterrestrial whose first mission on Earth was to be arrested at a violent demonstration.

Q: I don't want to play games with you. We need to identify you. There a re serious consequences if you don't comply with our questioning.

A: Do you think this would be an appropriate time for me to lawyer up?

Q: That is up to you to determine. Is it time?

A: I could go on with this all day, you're the one who seems to be frustrated.

Q: I can do this all day too, but I'm not, because as you said, you're ready to crack.

A: I don't know, maybe I've got a second wind.

Q: And what would be the cause of this second wind?

A: You know the way of the will, it just arrives.

Q: Perhaps the best course of action would be to let you sit: it worked the first time.

A: Oh please don't go.

Q: You want me to stay, yet you don't want to talk.

A: I do want to talk, I just don't want to give my last name. My name is Mark. Isn't that enough for you?

Q: No it isn't quite enough for me. Please consent to the line a of questioning.

A: Can't we get back to that, I swear I will tell you at the end of all this.

Q: This is the end. What is your name?

A: I'm not ready for the end. Don't forget that I'm this super dangerous terrorist.

Q: You're a bit lucid for a terrorist.

A: Well that's nice to hear, thank you.

Q: Do I need to tell you about the consequences if you don't tell us your name?

A: You won't know what to write on the celebratory cake you baked for me?

Q: You will not be allowed to leave until you supply us your name.

A: But there will be cake, right?

Q: There will be no cake, but we will give you a sandwich.

A: Like any type of sandwich? Because I would like a Reuben.

Q: We have turkey and tuna fish.

A: Oh that's gross. I guess I'll take a tuna fish.

Q: Do you want it now?

A: Yeah now would be great.

Q: How about I give it to you after you give me your name?

A: Oh, a rewards system, now we're talking. What else can I get?

Q: You can get a sandwich or nothing.

A: Oh, a punishment system. I see.

Q: This is the way it's going to be.

A: I think it must be against the law. I suppose it is rather out of the ordinary for someone in my position to not get a lawyer, but I just know he's-- or she's-- going to tell me a to stop talking and I really really like talking.

Q: What would you like to talk about?

A: I would like to talk about the wind. Why does it blow?

Q: I think it has to do with the rotation of the earth.

A: This is your hypothesis?

Q: Yes.

A: You know it's wrong, though, right?

Q: If you knew the answer already, why would you ask the question?

A: I guess I wanted to achieve the upper hand, intellectually.

Q: And does that make you feel better?

A: I thought it would, but it didn't.

Q: And why is that?

A: Because I still am a subject to you.

Q: What would help you feel equal to me?

A: Maybe if you took off some of your clothes. Like your shirt or your pants.

Q: I'm sorry but I am not a homosexual.

A: Oh me neither, though I do love seeing people get humiliated. That's the real turn-on.

Q: Do you like to be humiliated?

A: Oh I am quite addicted to it. Yes, I love the feeling of shame.

Q: What makes you feel ashamed?

A: I love it when people mock my masculinity and repeat back phrases I have just uttered. I like people laughing at my exceptionally small penis. I like stains on my clothes, from either fallen food or bodily secretions. I like being powerless in the face of violence and physical degradation against my will. I like all kinds of pervy stuff.

Q: I don't feel comfortable with this information.

A: Oh thanks, that makes me feel bad, which I like, so again, yeah, thanks.

Q: You know Mark, although you are clearly quite fascinated by yourself, I find you on the other hand quite dull. You seem to be all surface, and vulgarly manipulative, and it makes me queasy to share a room with you.

A: Wow, jeez, that was a good one, but you know you're a bit manipulative as well.

Q: Mark, I'm just doing my job and you're giving me a hard time.

A: Oh, I know dear, and I'm quite sorry, but I just can't give you what you want.

Q: You're not in trouble, but you might be if you continue with this course.

A: There you go, you know threats are quite effective against me. I feel ready now.

Q: You're ready? So what is it?

A: Mark Fucksman.

Q: Mark.

A: Fucksman. I'm sorry it's a foolish name. Now maybe you see that I was too embarrassed to share.

Q: Maybe you will disappear.

A: Excuse me.

Q: Maybe we will find your name when a missing persons report surfaces.

A: This is a very serious threat.

Q: I'm a very serious guy.

A: So you're going to what? Dump me in the river?

Q: I guess the river would work.

A: Oh my God, you're scaring me. Fine I'll tell you. Mark Denizen.

Q: Thank you Mark. That will be all.

A: That's it? I'm free to go.

Q: You're free to go-- once we confirm your name against the database.

(Q leaves)

A: Oh god, they're going to cut my throat like a dog. Why do I have to stand up to my beliefs? I suppose this is destiny, I'll just be another martyr for the cause of longer weekends and free money. This hideously cruel world, why do you torment me? What's going to happen to me? I'll never be alone again. I am in this world and I don't want to be. I want to be free. I need to run away. Why am I so weak? Why aren't I strong? An empty threat makes me abandon my defenses. What am I to do? I'll never feel safe again. I want to whimper like a dog, but no. I must be strong. I must face my death like a man. They can put me down, but they can't put all of us down. Oh shit, yes they can, they can put all of us down. We are all already down. What is the fate of this cruel world? Cursed are we who stand on two feet. I suppose that's not quite true. Things could be worse. I could not be myself. I could feel an ever-increasing pain. I suppose I do feel an ever-increasing pain though. Things couldn't be worse. Why was I born? Why was I born into this? Why couldn't I have been born free, free to hunt and gather and fight for my territory. I suppose I do hunt and I do gather and I do fight , but I lose, I lose, I lose. Why can't I ever win? Why do you detest me Lord? Maybe this will work out fine. Maybe I will be fine. Maybe I have impressed them with my wit. Maybe they'll make me into a secret agent. I certainly could handle the part. I would do great as a secret agent. If you can't beat them then you should join them, an old adage goes. Perhaps this is the beginning of a beautiful new life for me. Certainly my old life was getting worn out and tired. I needed a change. The Lord doesn't shut a door without opening a window to crawl out of. But there's no windows in this room. No worries, it was a metaphorical expression. Jeez, Sometimes I really don't get it. I must be slow. There must be something wrong with my mind. Am I crazy? Yes, probably. I'm still speaking aloud. I could be doing this all inside my head but I'm not, I am actually speaking all these words. And where does it get me? They are probably going to lock me up, but at least I will probably get my own cell, which makes it a lot easier to jerk off. Not that I'm ashamed of my body, I just think it's rude to jerk off when someone else is in the room. I find mutual masturbation odd. There are more satisfying things to do with bodies, you know? Oh my god, what am I talking about? And why am I even talking. I should just silently go to my death with dignity and honor. There's nothing honorable about dying-- immortality is an honor, not dying. I'm going to scream. I am going to scream until they come in and help me. They will probably administer a shot if I start screaming. I do like good dope but I need to stay sharp if I am to get out of this. I need to get out of this. There is still hope, right? I mean, I shouldn't give up, right? Right? Why aren't I answering me? Oh my god, I've really lost it now. If only I had a mantra, i could use the mantra and then I would know exactly what to say. I would repeat this phrase until I die, and if i repeat it enough, maybe it will still resound after my death. All words are immortal-- they all exist on a different plane of reality, though I suppose they are on a plane that is only accessible through the human meat machine. What is the consequence of this? I don't know, but don't look back. You can never look back. Keep moving forward. They will be here soon, things will resume their pace. This is a short interlude of solitary confinement but you're making it through with your scrappy sense of reason and an unstoppable momentum. Very good Mark, you're doing well. It is good to see you. You look well today. Thank you, and yourself? I will have the foie gras, if you don't mind. No, of course I don't mind, you may order whatever you like. Oh, thank you for your hospitality. Thank you for thanking me, but I don't think it is hospitality when I pay for your meal at a restaurant. Perhaps if I were to cook you a meal at home, then it would be hospitality. Oh silly me, I just say the words I think are right. I don't have a lot of experience in dealing with people. Oh, well though that is quite evident, I think you are doing a charming job at it. Yes, well, thank you. Do you think the captain will let me into the cabin? I would rather enjoy flying this plane. You seem to be mistaken my friend, we are on a boat. We are in a restaurant on a boat? I thought we were in a restaurant in a plane. Well, technically we are in a interrogation cell at the police station, so we can imagine we are where ever we want. What is going on with me? Why am I thinking these thoughts? Why am I saying these words? I must be losing it.

(Q re-enters the room)

Q: Okay Mr. Denizen, we can proceed with the questioning

A: Oh great, I'm overjoyed.

Q: Do you have any affiliations with anti-Israel organizations?

A: What? No. No way.

Q: You're not interested in the plight of the Palestinians?

A: Not particularly. Should I be?

Q: It is not uncommon for someone of your situation to be involved in such an organization.

A: No. Are we finally talking politics? I wasn't exactly ready for this.

Q: You were arrested in connection to an anti-governmental protest. I should think that politics are often on your mind.

A: Well, yes, but not as pressing as matters of metaphysics and science.

Q: So your protest was connected to your metaphysical beliefs?

A: Yeah, I think I should be paid to sit on my ass.

Q: I don't see how a that would serve society, Mr. Denizen.

A: I believe slavery should be resumed on a non-racial basis. Slavery as needed.

Q: Do you think most of your colleagues share this view?

A: No, as in everything, I am alone with this.

Q: Do you have any connections to Al-Qeada?

A: Never heard of those guys.

Q: Surely you are joking.

A: I'm pretty hazy on history after World War Two. That's as far as we made it in high school History class.

Q: Your joking is not helping the cause of your freedom.

A: I know. What is wrong with me? I really should be taking this serious situation more seriously.

Q: I agree, Mr. Denizen.

A: Well, really, What is wrong with me?

Q: Perhaps it is a case of Oppositional-Defiance Disorder.

A: That's too technical for me, Doc. For a laymen?

Q: I guess I would consider you an asshole.

A: So you're saying I contract and excrete shit?

Q: In so many words, yes.

A: Well is there any cure?

Q: There are some cures, but I don't think you would like it.

A: Oh, you're probably right, I hate things I don't like.

Q: Very cute.

A: See, I'm not just any asshole, I'm a cute asshole.

Q: I feel myself being degraded by being in contact with you

A: That isn't a very nice thing to say, you've hurt my feelings.

Q: I don't mean to be rude, but you are a quite unpleasant person.

A: You deal with terrorists everyday, and I am unpleasant? Well maybe not everyday, I can't imagine there are that many terrorists, I mean, I barely ever hear of something happening.

Q: You don't hear about it because of the expediency of which I perform my job.

A: Well I really ought to shake your hand my friend. Seriously, I am so happy I am not dead.

Q: Are you being sarcastic?

A: Why would I want to be dead? No one wants that. No I was trying to be sincere.

Q: I deal with people who really don't mind if they die: suicide-bombers.

A: Yeah, well I'm not one of the them.

Q: That is the point which we are trying to ascertain.

A: Touche. Well, how can I convince you that I am harmless?

Q: It would help if you would just answer my questions.

A: You got it. Shoot-- but not literally. I mean, ask.

Q: Have you ever had any contact with Chechen separatists?

A: No, I have never met a Chechen, though I would like to.

Q: You would like to?

A: I don't know, yeah, I think it would be interesting to meet a Chechen.

Q: You are aware that there are many Chechens involved in terrorist plots.

A: Yeah, I know, but I'm not going to hold that against a person I have never met.

Q: Hmm.

A: Hmm? I answered that question wrong, didn't I.

Q: I would say so.

A: Can I take that back then?

Q: I'm afraid you can't.

A: So I'm a terrorist because I wouldn't deny a Chechen the right to hang out?

Q: You seem to be interested in terrorists and terrorist activity.

A: No, I'm interested in scientists and scientist activities.

Q: Are you interested in conspiracy theories?

A: I mean, as much as anyone. Is the Illuminatus Trilogy a conspiracy book? Is Thomas Pynchon a conspiracy theorist?

Q: I am not familiar with these works. Do they involve conspiracies?

A: I mean, I guess, but they're fiction and I know it, they know, and everyone knows it.

Q: Are you interested in Presidential assassinations?

A: I mean, I guess I read Libra by Don DeLillo, but that's just one book.

Q: Hmm.

A: Oh shit, I get it now, I'm supposed to lie and deny all your questions. Jeez, what an idiot. I think I got it now.

Q: Have you--

A: No.

Q: I didn't ask the question yet.

A: I sorry, all your “hmmms” have made me nervous. I'm a little on edge, could I get a beer?

Q: No, that is not possible.

A: I'm sorry what was I thinking. Could I get a Xanax?

Q: Are you prescribed Xanax?

A: No, but I always enjoy it, when I can get it.

Q: Do you often abuse prescription drugs?

A: If I said yes, would that be a good thing? I mean, junkies are never terrorists, right? I mean at this point in history?

Q: It's not good or bad, we're just interested in who you are. Although, in my opinion, abusing prescription drugs is not healthy behavior.

A: Yes, I suppose I am a real sick one.

Q: What other drugs do you use?

A: Oh, right, none. I don't use drugs ever. That would be, like, super-duper bad of me. I'm a good boy.

Q: I take it that you are being dishonest.

A: No, I mean, maybe, yeah, maybe I have smoked pot in the past, but I'm not high now and that's what counts.

Q: So how often do you smoke pot?

A: That's all in the past, man, I'm on the straight and narrow. You've scared me straight. I'm going to become a stockbroker, one who never ever uses cocaine, if they let me, I mean, with your permission, sir.

Q: Okay, I feel like I have enough to work with.

A: That's it? I suppose that was enough. I mean I'm not quite satisfied, but when am I ever? I mean it should be clear that I'm not a terrorist, but somehow i am disappointed that I'm not. Do you ever feel like that?

Q: No. You can leave now.

A: That was too easy. I'm such a fool, I could have drawn this out, but I got spooked. What a bummer. And you didn't even ask about Ali...

Q: Who is Ali?

A: Oh just this guy I know. Pretty sure he wants to be a terrorist.

Q: Do you have a last name?

A: No, but I could point him out to you.

Q: You're making this up, aren't you? This is a very serious situation, you won't do yourself any favors if you lie.

A: No, I swear, I know him and he's like really serious about blowing stuff up.

Q: What makes you say this?

A: Well, it's just this once he made a sound like an explosion and did the explosion hand motion when we were talking about parking downtown. I didn't think it was anything at the time, but now I think he is definitely planning something.

Q: This is a very serious accusation you're making. Something makes me believe you are lying. What does Ali look like?

A: He's like this Arab dude who wear t-shirts, like a scraggly beard and stuff. I don't know, he looka like a man.

Q: Hold on, I have to confer with a colleague. I'll be right back.

(Q leaves the room)

A: Oh no, it's happening again, I can feel it, I mean I can hear it-- I'm talking still. This would be a very good time to hold my tongue. Oh jeez, what can I do? Old MacDonald had a farm, E-I-E-I-O, anything but what is on my mind. If I could just say something that is the opposite of what I am thinking right now I would be in good shape. I am thinking one thing while saying another thing that I am also thinking, but I'm not saying the thing I don't want to say, while at the same time I am not saying what I want to say, i want to say something unrelated to what I'm thinking, and instead i seem to be narrating my thought-actions. Are thought-actions a thing? I never heard that combination of words, this is good I am getting off topic. This is good. Oh no, what is happening, they're listening to me, I better be good and not say the wrong things. This is very important. Oh my god Mark what are you doing? What are you doing? Why are you doing this? This is very bad, you shouldn't be doing this, you better hope they don't catch you doing this. This is very important. It is very important. It is good. It is bad. It is indifferent. It shouldn't have to be this way. It could be any number of other things. It is good. It is bad. It is indifferent. It could be any number of things. It could be good. It could be bad. It could be indifferent. It could be any number of things. It should be good. It should be bad. It should be any number of things. It should be indifferent. Oh no I made a mistake in sequencing. There's no going back-- I can't unsay anything. I wish I could unsay so many things. It would be good if i could. It would be bad if i could. It could be indifferent. It could be any number of things.

(Q re-enters room)

Q: Okay, so tell me why you think we should be interested in your friend Ali.

A: Friend, did I say friend? He's just a guy I know, I mean, I don't really have any friends.

Q: I'm not surprised.

A: Yeah, well, I've met many people, you know how it is.

Q: So when did you meet him?

A: I met him at a protest. A protest in the past, maybe six months ago.

Q: The march six months ago?

A: Yeah, that was it, but it was just briefly, I talked to him maybe four minutes.

Q: And what did he talk about?

A: He talked about the plight of the Indian, and farm-workers, and the revolution. But everyone talks about the revolution.

Q: What did he say about the revolution?

A: He said we're going to get their backs against the wall and he made a machine gun sound. I thought that was uncalled for. I mean let's get their backs against the wall and make them work at Starbucks or something. I believe in more poetic forms of justice.

Q: Who is the “they” you're referring to?

A: You know, our corporate oppressors, the government, the judges, the jerks, the clerks, the clerics, the seers, the starers, the starters, the farters, the feelers, the furries, the freaks, the fairies, the free, the foils, the feeble, the frail, the victims, the heroes, the soldiers, the stars, the sky, you know, “They.”

Q: No one is trying to oppress you. You are free to live your life. What is your problem?

A: I know. I wish I could take it back. I just want to be happy. I just want to live my life. I wish I could sing. Then I would be star of a grand opera. Please let me go. I'm scared. I don't want to do this anymore. Let me go please. Don't tell anyone what I've said, please.

Q: It's a little late for that, but I appreciate you coming forward, eventually.

A: Please, I need protection. I've made an accusation against a dangerous man, he's going to kill me.

Q: You will be fine. He won't hear about you.

A: He'll know what I have said, he'll know I talked to you. He knows I'm weak with a big mouth. Please don't let me die.

Q: No one is going to kill you. Please stop freaking out.

A: I been freaking out for the past hour, I been freaking out my entire life. I don't like this. Please keep me safe.

Q: I suppose we can hold you while we investigate this Ali, although a last name would greatly help us in this matter.

A: I am such a shit, I volunteered that information. What is wrong with me, why am I like this?

Q: You must feel an obligation to help your country.

A: No, I was lying. There is no Ali, I was lying.

Q: Is this true?

A: Completely true, I'm a liar who just wants attention. Please don't make me be alone..

Q: This is really quite perverse. Let me confer with my colleague.

(Q exits the room)

A: Oh my God, what is wrong with me? Why was I born this way? I am a hopeless scab. I have scabies, I have rabies, I have dementia, I have erectile dysfunction. I have herpes, I have hepatitis, I have HIV/AIDS, I have laryngitis. I have cancer, i have the cure, I have a box, I have some rings, I have money, i have doughnuts, I have love, I have hate, I have everything and nothing all wrapped up in one. What am I going to do? This guy is going to kill me and dump me in the river. I wish I could be beamed back up to the mothership. Why is this not a dream? I should simply be dreaming this horrible nonsense. Why did this have to happen to me? Dear God, if I get out of this I promise I will never protest anything. I will stay at home and watch television all the time and devote myself to silent prayer in your name. Please send me a sign, a sign that says I will be safe. I don't want to worry any more. I want to feel secure in my ontology. I want to be safe in my skin. Don't take my soul as one of your possessions. I want to escape. Dear God, get me out of this. Why am I like this? What is wrong with me? I can't help myself-- I just keep talking, digging my own grave. They're going to put a bullet in my head and bury me. Why do I do this to myself? I can't help myself. Give me the the strength of self control. Why am I talking aloud? This is not a good thing. This is a bad thing. It is not indifferent. There could be so many different things. Different things are good. Different things are bad. Different things are indifferent. Different things are plentiful. I want to get lost inside my soul. I want to get lost inside a shopping mall. I want to get stuck in between a doorway. I want to be struck by a hammer. I want to slip into a dream. I want different colors to surround me. I want to be a part of everything. I want to sing with the angels. I want to lose my mind. I want to forgive my father. I want to lose everything. I want to forgive my mother. I want to sleep with the babysitter.

(Q re-enters room)

Q: Okay, Mr. Denizen, you're free to go, for real this time.

A: What? I mean, okay. I mean, so now you're going to follow me, right?

Q: You may hear from us in the future, you may not. It depends how things go.

A: I won't be able to walk around without looking for you over my shoulder.

Q: Don't be alarmed, just stay out of trouble, okay?

A: Okay, I will. Thank you, I've had the best time here today.

Q: You're welcome. Now please leave.