/B/ for Bendetta

I have chosen to do a semiotic analysis of a short thread from the image board of 4chan. I will mainly be focusing on the first post of the thread since that is the most interesting of the bunch, from a semiotic point of view.

In the first thread we have three important signs all of which are signifiers rather than signified. All the signs are in other word representative rather than what the actually seem to be. The three important signs are the text, the Guy Fawkes mask and the eyes and mouth of the mask itself.

All the three signs are connotations which mean they are hard for people not of the community to understand, that you need inside knowledge of the current codes in order to decipher the message as a whole.

The first sign, the text, is an allusion to the film V for Vendetta. The text is a rewritten monologue from the film in which the protagonist gives a fiery introduction of himself using alliteration. In the film the alliteration is based on the letter V but here, as you can see, the author has chosen to use the letter B which alludes to the name of the image board in which the thread was made.

The second sign, the Guy Fawkes mask, is also alluding to the film in which an anonymous horde, all clad in masks, rises up to protest against their totalitarian government. Much like the members of 4chan are all an anonymous horde. This is also an allusion to a meme that has arisen on the boards. Members often proclaim while they are posting anonymously that “We are anonymous! We are legion!” meaning that you can not stop the invisible, anonymous army of 4chan, or something to that end.

The last sign is the eyes and mouth that have been photoshoped onto the mask. This sign signifies one of the oldest memes of 4chan, “cock mongler” or the newer and less provocative name “grin man”. The meme is simply an image of a man, wearing a t-shirt with a dinosaur on it, who is grinning like a madman. The image, and especially the face, is popular to photoshop into other images often with a comic result. The sign signifies the community of 4chan and especially the image board of /b/.

The most important of the signifiers are the eyes and the text. Removing the mask would probably not change the message by a lot. However the mask works to increase the allusion of the text.

The codes needed to understand the signs are: knowledge of 4chan community memes, knowledge of English and knowledge of either the film V for Vendetta or the comic bearing the same name.

Considering what you need to know in order to fully understand the post I would say that the post itself is not open to much interpretation. The connotations to a frequent visitor fo the boards are quite clear and are not really open for interpretation. I guess one could argue that the signs are denotations rather than connotations but if you remove them from the post most of their meaning would change. The signs, although not open for interpretations, are in deed very bound by context hence making them connotations.

The poster is using the signs to create a paradigm that appeals to the anonymous user of the image board itself. And I would say he is quite successful judging by the first couple of answering posts he got.

6 credit course Question 1: B

1. Answer one of the following, using 1200-1400 words.

a) Compare and contrast Sethe in Morrison’s Beloved and Jack in DeLillo’s White Noise in terms of how they function as types, representative of a certain social group in a particular time and place, and characterized according to certain novelistic literary conventions (such as style and genre).

b) Compare and contrast Beloved and White Noise in terms of how they express a vision of human agency that may be termed tragic. Consider also the limits of the tragic vision in each, in terms of contrasting or alternative visions/conventions such as romance and the absurd.

If Sethe in Toni Morrison’s book Beloved is an agent of tragedy, from a general human perspective, then she is so on a much more down to earth manner than Jack from White Noise. The tragic events that shape the destiny of Sethe and those around her can be clearly related to and obviously identified as traumatic. I am, of course, speaking of the physical abuse she suffered at the hands of her former owners but also about the more general theme of the book, the long lasting effects of slavery. Tremors of which could argued to be felt up until our current day and age. The rape of Sethe works as catalyst for the tragedy that is soon to be the rest of her life. The event works as a justification of the murder of her own child, Beloved, and that act later leads to Sethe becoming an outcast in the black community in which she resides. Incarcerated in her own house with her only daughter, Denver, until the ghosts, not literary, of her past comes back to haunt her and driving her off the edge of sanity in a true Shakespearian manner. Although she finds temporary happiness and comfort with Beloved it is but temporary and soon leads Sethe to darker times.

I say it is more down to earth due to the fact that the tragic events that take place are almost the universal definition, if there is one, of what the man in the street would call tragic. Rape, loss of sanity, excommunication, incarceration and of course the loss of one's own child, albeit at her own hand. That being said, the tragedy is not something that looms over the book itself but it is rather small events that happen and then have dire consequences.

In comparison to the more satirical or almost absurd tragedy that occurs in Don DeLillo’s White Noise you will find that the characters in Beloved have very down to earth reasons for their strife. The White Noise tragedy lies not in things that happen in the book, you do not get any concrete event which explains their weird obsessions with death. In fact it is the obsession and fear that is the tragedy itself. Every part of their life, both Jack’s and Babette’s, is tainted by the revelation that they indeed are going to die. This looming doom naturally leads to several events which could be labelled as tragedies which later culminates in the shooting of the lord of Dylar, Dr. Mink.

To sum up the first half of the answer: In Beloved events beyond the characters control forces them into a pattern of actions which leads them to tragedy while in White Noise the fear of their own demise makes them create tragedy, tragedy which could have been avoided had they not been so occupied by their own mortality.

The White Noise notion of fear having tragic consequences in the lives of people is indeed an up-to-date and contemporary theme highly relevant when one tries to understand contemporary society, even though it was written more than twenty years ago. Back then the cold war was still going on and the main enemy causing the most fear out of people around the world, but mostly in the United States and western countries, was the Soviet Union and communism. Today the antagonist and the agent of fear in our lives, and the lives of people living under the banner of American culture, is the silent and invisible threat of terrorism. The fear of dying due to old age, car crashes and smoking has been put in hold in favour for the horrible thought of being the victim of a sudden death at the hands of an ungodly Muslim terrorist. Most Americans seem to have a hard time understanding why not all countries share the same values or why they do not simply emulate the American society in order to increase their chances of leaving the poor house and joining the exclusive club that is western industrialized countries. The American society is, after all, to many Americans a universal model for success (Campbell & Kean, 2006: s267-270). In Jack’s and Babette’s case it is a question of not understanding why they have to die. In what way is that fair? Realizing that they can not escape their ultimate fate they try to cope with their fears. Babette’s hunt for a cure can easily be compared with people shuffling into stores buying radiation suits and gasmask in order to at least stand a fighting chance when the silent killer comes to town. Dr. Mink is in reality a symbol representing all opportunists who thrive on the irrational fears of others, allthough I guess a fear of death ultimately is not irrational but you get my point.

If one extrapolates what I have already said about Beloved and try to focus on what may be the ultimate catalyst to the tragic events that unfold in the book, which I estimate to be slavery. Toni Morrison tries, in Beloved, to give a black narrative to a dark chapter in American history which traditionally only had been commented on by well educated men, hence mostly white men in the middle to upper classes of society. She tries, as stated earlier, to give a glimpse of how slavery has worked to cripple the chances of black Americans to move up in both social and monetary status. And this confirmed by Campbell and Kean: “[…] through the reconstruction process of telling African-American history to remind her audience, both black and white, of the restrictions imposed on the opportunities of young blacks [...] (Campbell & Kean, 2006: s89). Although the quote was talking about The Bluest Eye, also written by Morrison, I do feel that also applies to Beloved, at least in regards to the perspective from which I have chosen to analyze the tragedies contained within the cover of the novel. Toni Morrison does not only let you see the long term effects of slavery, or what could potentially happen, but in the book she also forces the reader, as she is forcing the characters, to deal with the past no matter if you are black or white. Like Beloved comes to haunt Sethe and Denver in the book, you as a reader, is haunted by the reminder of a not so glorious past no matter what colour your skin is. This is also mentioned in American cultural studies on pages 89 to 90.

To summarize once again I think the main differences between the two books are perhaps what the authors chose as a focal point for what they deem as tragic. White Noise warns us not to dwell on the future and the coming of the inevitable darkness that is destined to be our grave, but to live your life to its fullest. There is folly to live in constant fear of potentials because you tend to miss out on all the good things that might happen.

This, of course, stands in stark contrast to Morrison’s word of warning. Morrison urges us not to forget from whence we came lest it come back to haunt us. For what we are today clearly is the product of a continually increasing pile of events which belongs to the past. History exists so that we may learn from our mistakes. Or as Konrad Adenauer would put it: “History is the sum of total things that could have been avoided.”

6 credit course Question 2: B

2. Answer one of the following, using 600-800 words.

a) Discuss the extent to which Dances with Wolves succeeds in relativizing the Euro-American perspective, taking a genuine Native American point of view .

b) Discuss the representation of masculinity in Fight Club.

Although I do feel that the theme of masculinity within Fight Club is secondary to the theme of consumerism I will try to give a thorough examination of the masculinity within the film.

With the rise of feminism at the beginning of the twentieth century and with its gained momentum within all branches of society and culture as we entered the twenty-first century one can ask the question: What happened to masculinity? With our culture now geared towards defining what feminism is and what proper male conduct should be a lot of men probably find themselves in a sudden state of emasculation. In today’s pro feminist society it is no longer okay for a man to be a man. To be a man is to be an oppressor of women and gender equality.

The film Fight Club we get to see a confused Tyler Durden living his life and not really knowing who he is. In his search for himself and his role in society he joins different crisis groups. One of which is for people with testicular cancer, people who have lost their manhood and are struggling to convince themselves that they are indeed men. Bob which later will join the fight club even has large breasts to further the image of these men as emasculated in a society dominated by a feminist agenda.

The fight clubs themselves, the amateur boxing clubs, work as a way for the members to express their chained up primitive urges. In fight club all men are equal and it is ok to give in to primitive, and traditionally male, urges which are no longer sought after by the rest of society. In the fight club they get a clear cut definition of who they are, they are members of fight club. No one asks any questions about them or about fight club, members are defined not by their gender but by their actions.

The masculinity in Fight Club is indeed portrayed from a more romantic and classical view. The definition is perhaps taken from a time where men were men, they worked hard, fought for their women and did other manly things. I think that this portrayal of masculinity is not without a hint of satire. It works more towards the mean of combating the dominant feministic view rather than as a dogmatic manual of manly etiquette. Although after the film premiered a bunch of real fight clubs were started, probably by people who did not understand that getting punched in the face hurts, a lot. But it is this reaction to film that gets me thinking that there is perhaps something missing in modern society in regards to masculinity. We live in a society where women can wear anything they want while men are limited to what is socially acceptable, hence no skirts for men. Besides the traditional taboos which men have in western culture we now also have a lot of added musts and don’ts which we did not have before. Being a man ends up being someone who is incarcerated in his own gender and not really understanding what his gender really is. Perhaps this is why Tyler Durden urges his members to go back to basics and perhaps this is why the members feel liberated by doing so.

FOX NEWS VERUS CNN: FIGHT!

I have chosen to analyze two different articles, one from CNN and one from FOX News, both articles report on the same event, a rocket barrage by Palestinians against Israel.

I would like to start my analysis by taking a look at the headlines for the different articles mostly because it is the first thing you read but also since the headline of an article is designed to get your attention and sets the mood for the rest of the of the text. If we take a look at the FOX headline in regards to end weight, that new and important information is put at the end of sentences, we see that the fox article tries to shift the focus not to where the attack took place but who actually fired the rockets, in this case Palestinian militants. The CNN headline on the other hand does not mention the word militant or even theorize on the culprit at all in the headline. In fact the word militant is not used until line nine in the article and even then they do not mention the word in conjunction with the rocket attack. The FOX headline also uses a quote directly in the headline, a quote which is used out of context, for the purpose of making the attack sound bigger and grander. 'Massive', to me, is a word a lot like 'awesome' in the sense that both words imply some kind awe. A massive attack, to me, is on an epic scale, an attack almost like an invasion of, in this case, Israel. By using the word FOX need not say the number of rockets fired but they simply imply the number to the reader, in this case a huge number, and if FOX ever were to be queried on the subject of the number of rockets fired they would be in the clear because, as I said, the word massive does not specify a number at all. The CNN headline does not imply a number at all but simply states that a rocket was fired into Israel from Gaza or rather that it was only one of them that hit a coastal city. In fact CNN even states that the rocket, the one, fired hit a target, in this case a coastal city. The FOX headline on the other hand simply says that massive amounts of rockets were fired and I would even go so far as to state that the FOX headline implies to the reader that the militants firing the rockets are stupid and unskilled and therefore could not hit the broad side of a barn if they stood in it, or something in that direction. I do admit that my analysis is tainted by the fact that I do know that FOX has a right wing bias, and are not ashamed of spinning their news that way, and because of that they tend to take the side of Israel no matter what.

Let us leave the headlines and proceed into the vast jungles that make up the text of these articles. The FOX article is a bit longer and a bit more detailed than the CNN one. The text tends to focus a lot on what the Palestinians did and justifying the actions of the Israelis. The Israeli airstrike is mentioned only as a subclause at first in the FOX article. While the CNN article, on the other hand, makes it quite clear that the rockets were following the Israeli airstrike. The FOX article later on describes the underlying factors to the conflict, but that is after they have made sure the focus is on the rocket attack that the Palestinian militants made. They finish off the background to the conflict by naming the casualties in the different incidents as Hamas militants and by doing so justifying the actions of the Israelis and again implying blame to the Palestinians. Fox then later on in the article mention that since the ceasefire has been put in place the Palestinians have provoked Israel on several occasions’, again shifting responsibility and blame away from Israel, with other attacks.

The CNN article, though it uses the word militant, only uses the word militant in conjunction with the word Hamas and they do thereby avoid calling all Palestinians a paramilitary force, which the FOX article do not. The CNN article sets aside a large quantity of text, relative to the article size, to describe the types of rockets used. They make a point that the rockets are crude and not very accurate, almost harmless, which of course they are not. CNN also cites representatives of Hamas and the Palestinians as sources for their article which sends a signal the reader, an Israeli partial American, that CNN has taken the time to see things from both perspectives, which may or may not be true. The only reference FOX does is a quote from an email from Hamas towards the end of the article, other than that they seem to be citing facts gained through the Israeli army and its representatives.

The last thing I would like to bring up is the difference in the amounts of rockets fired. In the CNN article there were about twenty rockets fired and one hit. The one that hit was a Quasam rocket, which they describe as crude and primitive. The FOX article describes that there were at least thirty rockets fired. The use of massive in conjunction at least implies to the reader that probably a lot more were fired. FOX also states, instead of saying there were no injuries, that there was no immediate word of injuries or damage which implies that there were injuries and damage, just not reported immediately. However the article leaves it at that, they never say if there were any reports later on, they leave that up to the reader’s imagination.

Since I am running out of space I am going to try and sum it all up. FOX makes no secret of it being partisan to the Israelis in its article and even though the article is more detailed than the one from CNN the extra details tend to work as a justification to the actions of the Israelis and their pre-emptive strikes. CNN at least makes a stab at being unpartisan although they obviously, in most cases and even so in this article, tend to side with the Israelis.

600 ord mod

Det är alltid svårt att definiera ord som alla tycks veta vad det är. Om alla vet vad mod är varför är då inte fler modiga? Mod tycks vara något ouppnåbart, något så sällsynt att man inte ens strävar efter att bli kallad modig. Detta i kontrast till begreppet lycka vilket alla tycks jaga efter med en blåslampa i högsta hugg.

Vad är mod? Det kanske är lättast att påbörja en definition av mod genom att redogöra för vad mod inte är. Mod, är inte att dö för sitt land. Mod, är inte att visa sig stark inför andra, att stå för något man säger, att vara principfast, stark och oövervinnerlig. Mod är inte det som de flesta tror mod är. Själviskhet, egoism och egocentrism är ord som vandrar längs den snäva bana där den generellt accepterade definitionen ligger. Det är inte mod att offra sig själv för att rädda sitt barn. Det är inte mod för en brandman at gå in i ett brinnande hus och det är inte mod att bita ihop och uthärda det outhärdliga. Vad är mod?

Mod är att kunna ställa frågan som ingen annan ställer. Att ifrågasätta sig själv, sin roll och delaktighet i en helhet som inte alltid är något man kan vara stolt över. Att ändra sig själv, sitt liv, sina åsikter så att man blir någon annan, någon som är bättre än den du är även om du inte gillar den du blir. Att sträva efter att bättra sig, att be om hjälp när man ligger ner, är utslagen, utmärglad och hjälplös även om det kostar din stolthet. Att öppna sig och inte spela med i livets pantomim, att visa alla vem du är, vad du står för och varför. Att inte vara principfast, att förändras, att byta roll och att vara ärlig. Är detta mod?

Att acceptera att vi alla skall dö är inte mod men att leva ditt liv för andra, att göra den tid andra har, den lilla tusendel av en sekund som vi alla har på universums tidslinje, att göra den tiden lite mer uthärdlig för alla, det kallar jag mod. Det är inte att dö som är svårt och outhärdligt, för dö kommer vi alla att göra. Det är att leva som är svårt, något som vi alla har svårt att undvika. Att inte bara leva i nuet utan även för framtiden, att inte bara leva för sig själv och sin familj utan att leva för andra och att inte bara leva på andra utan även med andra, det är svårt. Det kräver mod om något.

Vår värld är inte varmhjärtad, god och omtänksam. Den är kaotisk, hämndlysten och cynisk. Den bara finns och är, precis som vi bara är men det finns en skillnad: Vi vet att vi är, vi kan påverka den vi är och vi kan påverka hur andra är.

När vi gör livet bättre för andra, då är vi modiga. När vi lär oss något nytt eller när vi ändrar en uppfattning, då är vi modiga. När vi ser oss själva i spegeln och ser en möjlighet till förbättring snarare än perfektion eller imperfektion, då är vi modiga.

Mod är inget sällsynt, något som skall ställas på en piedestal. Modig kan alla vara, bör alla vara, det är lätt, tillgängligt och vackert. Mod detta enstaviga ord som ingen lägger märke till, som folk felrubricerar och sedan tror att det är ämnat för några få människor som är bättre än vad du är. Ingen är bättre än dig, du kan bli allt som alla andra kan bli, göra allt som de gör, lära dig allt som de lär. Det krävs vilja, det krävs förändring, det krävs mod.

An assignment.

4chan was first created in 2003 by Christopher Poole, although this might not be his real name, and has since then grown to be the second largest image board on the internet as well as one of the largest internet communities around. I say second largest image board since the largest one is the Japanese equivalent of 4chan, 2chan. 4chan started as an image board for people who were interested in Japanese cartoons, anime, or Japanese comic books, manga, but has since then grown to include a large variety of people. The most popular of the image boards on 4chan is by far /b/ or more commonly known as random. Random differs from the other boards in that there are no strict rules as to what you are allowed to post as long as it is not child porn, which is more or less the only rule that /b/ has. All the other boards on 4chan have different themes and your posts must be related to the stated theme. Examples of themes are anime, manga, food, weapons, news, traditional games, art and photography. As you can see there are a large variety of boards and it is almost impossible not to find one to ones liking.

What is an image board? Well it is kind of like a message board, and if you want you can post only text, except it focuses more image posting and compared to most message boards, which can make it a hassle to post images, 4chan has a fundamental and fairly easy interface when it comes to posting images. More or less you simply browse your hard drive for the image you want posted and then upload it to the 4chan server and you are done.

What separates 4chan from other communities? Well the main difference between 4chan and other message or image boards or even other communities as a whole is that 4chan has forced anonymity. Everyone posting is anonymous and it is even impossible for people wanting to post under a name to do so. The reason for this is often stated to be that what you say and think should matter more than who you are. Most posters refer to both themselves and others as anonymous with pride and the meme, which we will get into next, We are Anonymous, we are legion is often cited when talking about themselves since it is a common view that anonymous is indeed an invisible, unstoppable anonymous army or force fighting for the greater good or just for some lulz.

One of the keys to understanding what people say or refer to in a discussion on 4chan is to understand the thousands upon thousands of memes that exist. What is a meme then? A meme is, in this case, a catch phrase or an image spread voluntarily from peer to peer over the net. One might even define it as a tidbit of pop culture or information that has taken on a life on its own, spreading out to the masses. Most memes on 4chan, however, are internal jokes that seem to be nothing but gibberish to people from the outside world. But since 4chan manufactures many memes a lot of them have spread into other communities such as youtube or even television or film. For example Tay Zonday's song Chocolate Rain would not have reached its popularity if it had not been posted on 4chan. The rating on youtube rocketed as 4chan users flooded in to watch the tiny clip. The song has since then been sung by Tay Zonday himself on American national television and plenty of covers have been made of it by famous artist such as John Mayer and Tre Cool, the drummer from Green Day.

What about the language of 4chan? 4chan shares a lot of grounds, language wise, with 1337 speak. Although 4chan did not exist when 1337 was first used it has contributed to the evolution of 1337 speak. Many new words or phrases used by people writing or speaking 1337 have their origin from the internet sub culture of 4chan. For example typing orly or rly instead oh really or really is something that is derived from 4chan’s caturday meme, a day when you are only, unofficially, allowed to post cats in /b/. The fact that most people relate the phrase orly to be written on an image of an owl can be further used to argue that the image comes from the 4chan sub culture. But it is not only in text that you can communicate on 4chan but also, since it is an image board, through images. A common way to say someone is being stupid or an idiot is by posting a man that holds his right hand over his face. These types of images are known as facepalms and the word itself is also often used when someone needs to point out how frustratingly stupid the other person is. I guess you can say it is the 4chan equivalent of the doh! from the popular animated series The Simpsons.

The language that is posted on 4chan varies a lot from anonymous to anonymous but one might say that the non standard varieties and 1337 speak are the two most common written types of English on the image board, that and of course transcribed spoken English. However sometimes it can be easy to mistake a meme for poor grammar. For example the meme or phrase do not want is the same as the word no and is used in the same way. In fact the meme comes from a pirated version of Star Wars episode 3. When Darth Vader shouts out no towards the end of the film when he learns that his lover, Padme, is dead the word no is translated with the phrase do not want. Because of this the phrase do not want is widely used in the same manner as portrayed in the film, not only on 4chan, but in many other communities as well.

I feel that I am running out of space, there is of course a lot more to be said about the language and I could probably write a small thesis on the subject but since you wanted one page I almost have 3 I think I will stop now. I hope this is what you wanted otherwise I will have to revise the essay I suppose.

En kontaktannons.

Som så många tidigare nämnt så är det väldigt svårt att beskriva sig själv. Något som jag skulle vilja kalla skitsnack. Det svåra i en beskrivning av sig själv ligger inte i att man har svårt för att veta vem man är utan att man har svårt att sätta sig in i hur andra uppfattar den beskrivning men delger. Det svåra är alltså hur man skall ljuga, vad man skall utelämna och hur man kan manipulera för att få så stort intresse för sin profil som möjligt. Jag tänker därför göra ett litet experiment, jag tänker vara ärlig.

Om jag skulle sammanfatta min personlighet i en mening skulle det förmodligen vara: Älskad av få hatad av många. Varför det är just så har jag ingen aning om men jag har mina teorier. Dessa har framförallt att göra med att människor över lag inte tycker om att höra sanningar om varken sin person eller om vad de gör eller tycker. Något som jag har en tendens att berätta för dem. Inte så ofta för att vara elak utan mer för att människor ber om min åsikt.

Jag är även extremt självkritisk och anser mig på grund av detta inte vara särskilt intelligent. Detta trots att jag har blivit beskriven som den smartaste människan andra har träffat vid ett flertal tillfällen. Dock har jag insett att jag, i jämförelse med den normala standarden, är väldigt allmänbildad. Jag kan lite om allt och mycket om en del helt enkelt.

Jag fascineras lätt av människor och deras agerande, eller bara av världen i stort. Fascinationen skulle väl mest kunna liknas med den en 3-åring känner när han undersöker sin sula efter att ha trampat på en skogssnigel. Jag ser ner på väldigt många människor och det gör förmodligen mig till en hemsk person men om bara människor hade tagit sig lite tid och grubblat över vad de egentligen håller på med så hade jag inte behövt göra det. Det är inte så svårt som det låter, jag gör det hela tiden.

Jag diskriminerar inte roliga saker på grund av sociala normer. Om jag tycker något är roligt så gör jag det. Detta är förmodligen anledningen till att jag är allmänbildad. Det finns helt klart anledningar till att människor gör saker och jag har kommit fram till att den anledningen oftast är att det faktiskt är roligt. Folk spelar datorspel för att det är roligt, folk dricker alkohol för att det är roligt, folk har sex för att det är roligt, folk tittar på film för att det är roligt, folk åker utomlands för att det är roligt. Därför har jag ett öppet sinne och provar allt en gång, det vore synd att missa något som är roligt. Med tanke på hur världen ser ut så behöver vi alla de få roliga stunder som finns.

Till slut vill jag prata lite om snällhet, för snällhet tycks vara något som är populärt. Alltid när man läser andra profiler kan man se hur människor stolt proklamerar, likt en 7 åring som beskriver positiva egenskaper hos sin fröken, att de är en snäll tjej, flicka eller tös. Jag själv, däremot, är inte snäll. Jag är elak och jag trivs med det. Jag gillar att jävlas med folk, prova gränser och visa min överlägsenhet. Trots detta är jag den snällaste, mest godhjärtade, personen jag träffat under min korta livstid här på jorden. Det säger kanske mer om de jag träffar än om mig själv säger ni. Men om man tänker efter en extra gång: Hur många gånger gör jag snälla saker av enbart altruistiska anledningar? För de flesta, mer normala människor tror jag nog, handen på hjärtat, skulle svara aldrig. Åh andra sidan gör jag det hela tiden, jag går ständigt omkring och gör små och stora goda gärningar utan att för den delen själv få ut något av det. Jag mår inte ens bra av det. Varför? För att jag aldrig får någon respons på mina handlingar, och om det är respons man vill ha, för att man skall må bättre, då är det inte längre en altruistisk handling utan en självisk.