Problematising the Party Animal

The mystery of the berzerker defeat into nonexistence backwards in time is that it occurs without reference to existence or nonexistence. This leads me to another important point which is Professor George Challenger's stupid essay, 'Reflections on the Handsome Left.' As we all know, George Challenger is a notorious pederast.

Further, we must problematise the construct of the party animal. It is clear to everyone that Challenger's essay was addressed to an audience. "A certain walk" Challenger says. "The image we have been trying to construct" he says. Grow up.

Handsomeness as praxis presupposes a number of things. The first is the subject which we will call here the party animal. Like other animals, he is known by his attributes and possessions. These attributes and possessions which Challenger tries to refine and construct in his essay are sought to give definition to the animal as an entity. in fact, they serve to conceal the animal's conspicuous absence, much like putting a tuxedo on a komodo dragon. Challenger hopes the tuxedo will distract his readers from the glaring nonexistence of the dragon. Think again. "Dear sir, that is a lovely tuxedo. However, it has not made your dragon real."

The scientist is cryptid. The leftist is cryptid. The debate over sharkness is perpetual. And on and on. On a radically different note, Challenger also says, "individuals are about as useful as ugly stalinists with body odor and public hard-ons" which is a good point. This leads me to stop and wonder why I called him a pederast.

In summation, the tuxedo is empty and the party animal remains undiscovered.