Can you imagine what happened when “a dot” stepped onto the confines of a deliminated public space, or park and found itself empty, single, frustrated and above all vulnerable to unstable volatility? Now what do you think happened when a second dot joined the formation? Was it by some random event and possibly chance that the two candidates for world peace established such a harmonious relationship that it eventually became a justified ground for a nobel prize nomination? Possible. Likely would lead to many confusions and misinterpretations. We’re talking about a colon here after all, and what harm could a colon do.
Although two equidistant parts are fixed in space, neither in conflict, nor in utopian harmony but in complete nothingness, were so perfectly aligned that it led to me writing this entry, the act of me pointing it out does not do it justice. A further, more elaborate account as to why this may be needs to be further enquired into.
Is this all just logical blah blah blah? Nonsense.
Initially I questioned the positioning of the two components of elements making up this relationship that we have established to be called a “colon.” Hierarchy aside, there is a slight chance that the dot above may arguably exercise some arbitrary or absolute, if not de jure then at least de facto control over its lesser and more frivolous sibling, the bottom imperfection or lack thereof for that matter. I can’t say, with all certainty, that potential inferrence will cause for much indecisiveness on my part; Dot one and dot two are involuntarily distinguishable, but at the same time, equal and fulfilling the same function: a colon.
This is not a practical discussion, and I’m not a pragmatist. Fury is my main objective. Can the reader attend to a more confused display of mental diarrhea? It’s likely. Can the reader play second fiddle to an interpretation that only the mentally insane can ever become pregnant with? Unlikely; impossible.
My point is as follows. I don’t have a point. Why are you reading this? Exactly, my point exactly. So while I don’t have a point at first, or prima facie, I do have a point after all. You may think this is useless and come to the conclusion that while it is useless, it also does not have a point, but what’s your point? Did you have a point in mind when you first “arrived” upon this wonderful and brilliant display of reckless linguistics? I didn’t think so. So why gain with no loss? Makes sense only to the nonsensical. I end.
*I have been deeply immersed in legal cases and the very theories driving the argument behind why they should compel individuals to obey or disobey. On this topic another time: I do have some points to make, but … as I said, making a point and not making a point is subjective. Depends who you talk to, why you talk to them, and what they have in mind when talking to you. Making points is like drawing dots, you don’t have to draw a dot, you can just draw a colon, two dots, and make more than one point. But then what’s my point? The aforementioned does not make any sense. My point exactly.
May you be victorious.