You know, I always say that there is nothing but the thing.

I had a feeling you were going to say that.

It is impossible to understand the implications of the thing—unless you want to get personal, which you know I never do.

Yes, but what about the thing's aesthetic implications? You can't ignore that.

Yes, you can. We've been over this before, Paul. All perception is just experimental.

Yes, but can't we put a value on that? It just all seems so uptight that we can't place any importance on that perception. What about humans?

Well, yes, they are objects, too.

Okay… maybe I need to branch out and stop hanging out with Symbolists.

Fine. I'm here if you need me.

Well, I always have trouble knowing when I'm finished. Maybe I should write novels with happy endings, or five-paragraph essays—it's just so much easier when you know all you have to do is recap, right? Aphorisms are just so to the point... but sometimes I just can't come to the point. I mean, what's the point?

The point is the point.

What do you think of this one: "People can be such judgers, not to be judgmental or anything."

Hmm…. a little too pointed. How about: "I judge. You judge. We all judge."

Wait. I think I hit the nail on the head: "Our judgments judge us."

Likes this.

You are such a square, Paul. What's the big deal with a little nudity?

It's not so much what is there as what is not there that I find so provocative.

You mean, like clothes?

I just feel like Manet was holding out on us.

This is getting awkward…

I'm talking about the absence of her Being, you perv.

Wow. I'm glad you told me, because I just did not get that.