11. (Even the sight of you makes me want to rape an alter-boy after I’ve just burnt down a library.
i wrote two letters tonight, well, this morning. one to tristan, and one to autumn. the subject for this post is a line in autumn's letter. this line is especially meaningful because of it's hilarity. it is hilarious because it is ironic. last night 5/3/04 around 10pm, after we had just gotten done burning a calculus book in the fireplace downstairs tristan is yelling at me for allowing the book burning to happen. really, i don't care about anything that he's saying, and i start to laugh! i am laughing at my irate-idiot-roommate in the face! that was possibly the most beautiful thing that i've done in quite sometime. well, after tristan leaves to go yell at jason, jerad, and the rest of the skin-headed-NAZI-hitler-youth who abide in mcsweeney, i ask autumn why she was so upset about us burning the calc book (she nearly reached into the brimstone-fireplace to save it from certain doom) because she was obviously peeved about it. well she proceeds to tell me that there are two things that she considers evil. one: the destruction of innocence. and two: the destruction of knowledge. she's such a stupid twat for saying this. obviously, i don't care that we were dancing around flaming literature; obviously, i don't care about anything that has ever come out of her mouth, she has never had a reason for her opinions, and thus she is a stupid twat. i don't like twats, and i like stupid twats even less. but, without a doubt: the bitch gets me thinking again... why is it that only idiots can question my rationale? it's because i only have to prove my point through careful scrutiny with an idiot, intelligent people may argue with me, but they are still able to understand why i think the way i do. so, later that night, i'm laying in my bed thinking about evil, what i consider to be evil, and how autumn's definition of evil is so inadequate. there are so many more things in life than innocence and knowledge. she must value those pretty highly to have the absence of them be considered evil. another thing that i was thinking about last night was tristan: i'm worried about him. he is incredibly backwards in his thought, especially in his "madness". although, i think that it is only in his "madness" that he becomes authentic in identity. he tries to call himself existential, but he is so false, he is so dead. i'm worried that he'll come to know falsehood as reality and blame it on his own false representation of existentialism. tristan comes alive when he is angry. it is the only time when he is concerned about anything but himself. i'm glad that he is angry with me, because at least when i see him now, he is alive. i'm glad that he can feel so strongly about something, but he shouldn't be mad at me, because i don't care anything for what he is potent about. he shouldn't be angry and accost people who he is disagrees with; that is irresponsible, and idiotic. he is in himself an idiot, and for himself hungry for idiocy. if he, as the supposed existentialist he is, wants to think that he can treat others any way he wants to and have them be exactly how he thinks that they should be, then he is not an existentialist, he is an essentialist. essence precedes existence. we are creatures of fate and doomed to be what we are. he is an idiot for thinking as such. sartre says that we, ourselves, should believe and act how we want others (the world) to act. if tristan wants the rest of the world to be angry and complain all the time, then he is doing a wonderful job at it. especially with his assumption of almighty twat-ed-ness last night.