Memo from the movement itself
Why does death seem like so much more an 'elemental' force than other events? This is outrageous, it is not supposed to happen at this velocity, that is, this much death-per-year of life. I have now known three kids my age to die, one being the first homicide in DC in 2003, the next drowning in his own puke and the third dying of I don't know what.
The third might be the largest loss, even being the one I knew the least; he was as passionate as myself or more about literature and about the greatest teacher I have ever had, Richard Begam. He always said his intention was to become the High School version of Begam. I say largest loss, I mean largest to me, I would not presume to judge their importance to other people. And to me, simply because I envisioned a future friendship of endless mutual benefit. But, like I said, why does it seem more directed from some outward place, why does it seem more like a deterministic result-- obviously because it is so outrageous and unusual relative to the normative rest of life.
It seems so impactful, sudden, surprising, unexpected and ironic, so out of nowhere and out of somewhere, so important that it seems it must have been the result of a choice (who was consulted? who sent the memo?), a choice whether at its happening or numberless epochs ago by a first mover. This thought is damning to my here and my now and your here and our now, if accepted, and luckily at my very core I know its falsehood.
I cannot die; if what you call death hits upon me there will no longer be I. I am here, or I am not. The transfiguration which you call death I call the destruction of everything but because it is never experienced it happens beyond everything, beyond the zero. It cannot be experienced. Correction; the transfiguration you call death does not last even a moment, like any change from now to now. It does not happen beyond the zero, it is the zero, it does not happen. I cannot die. Only you can die, and yours, and theirs. Only, not in your opinion (he-he). I would end with something on the lines of R.I.P. Erik but I am not one for abortive symbolism.
The third might be the largest loss, even being the one I knew the least; he was as passionate as myself or more about literature and about the greatest teacher I have ever had, Richard Begam. He always said his intention was to become the High School version of Begam. I say largest loss, I mean largest to me, I would not presume to judge their importance to other people. And to me, simply because I envisioned a future friendship of endless mutual benefit. But, like I said, why does it seem more directed from some outward place, why does it seem more like a deterministic result-- obviously because it is so outrageous and unusual relative to the normative rest of life.
It seems so impactful, sudden, surprising, unexpected and ironic, so out of nowhere and out of somewhere, so important that it seems it must have been the result of a choice (who was consulted? who sent the memo?), a choice whether at its happening or numberless epochs ago by a first mover. This thought is damning to my here and my now and your here and our now, if accepted, and luckily at my very core I know its falsehood.
I cannot die; if what you call death hits upon me there will no longer be I. I am here, or I am not. The transfiguration which you call death I call the destruction of everything but because it is never experienced it happens beyond everything, beyond the zero. It cannot be experienced. Correction; the transfiguration you call death does not last even a moment, like any change from now to now. It does not happen beyond the zero, it is the zero, it does not happen. I cannot die. Only you can die, and yours, and theirs. Only, not in your opinion (he-he). I would end with something on the lines of R.I.P. Erik but I am not one for abortive symbolism.