28/10/2002 - 12:18 a.m.

We're all mad here.

I'm trying to come up with ideas for a new quiz. I'm thinking of maybe making it refer to past entries, but I don't think that many people retain random useless information so well. I was thinking perhaps an Elves quiz, but the problem with that is that it would be language and history, and those are the bits of the last quiz no one did well on. And also that many people would probably mistake the word for Elvis.

I've now read all the Tom Stoppard in the script library. I finished Artist Descending a Staircase a bit ago. Wow. That may be the cleverest idea I've seen in a play in a while. I liked Night and Day, but it didn't really do anything for me.

I'm glad I'm not a writer in the sense that some people are, going around looking at all the sick twisted people and thinking to write a play with them in it. You know, some of the normal people are just as interesting. And I'm not really quite over the people who will only write "gay plays". Edward Albee said that straight people didn't go around writing plays making a big deal that all the people in them were straight. I can see both sides of the argument here- no, straight people don't do that, but they aren't being treated the less because of it. Sometimes I agree wholeheartedly with Albee, and sometimes I simply can't agree.

Did I mention that I think the way the media is treating the suspected serial killers is abominable? The last I saw anything about it (granted, that was two days ago or so) they were already being treated as though they had done it- no question. Innocent until PROVEN guilty, isn't that the way we say we run it in this country? What gives anyone any grounds to say anything like "oh, yeah, they were the ones that did it", until the evidence against them is given at the trial?

This is the same problem I'm having with this room change. People adore living by assumptions. They simply assume something, despite what is actually written, or said, and take it for fact. To these people it doesn't matter what the words they write might actually say, but they go on interpereting them in the same incorrect way. How can anything mean anything to anyone if we keep this up? Everything turns to one great miserable muddle of what we "mean" verses what we "say", and nothing can be accurate then.

Lewis Carrol knew how it was. To say that "I say what I mean" and "I mean what I say" is along the same principle as to say "I see what I eat" and "I eat what I see" are the same. It's a simple question of logic.