_____
I bring a sort of investigative vibe to small incidents that people convinced of their own stories don’t really like.
_____
A woman cloaked, in ornate robes, stands aghast as a stone fortress is erected in front of her. The carved walls look identical to her drawings, even more grand than the version before that fell.
The songs of birds carry on naturally while the sun rises and falls over and over and the structure grows double-time. The woman takes a single breath and a decade passes. She feels a warm wind at her back nudge her toward an empire.
Reluctant, she takes a step. Thunder cracks.
A violent wind rushes in like the walls that had held it back for centuries finally succumbed. One by one, the stones that were climbing at golden hour are tumbling and shattering in a monsoon. The woman remains still as her eyes fall to the earth, and utters, “Did I get it wrong again?” as a ghostly serpent descends.
The little girl spooks as her mother storms through the living room and knocks her colorful block tower to the carpet without apology.
The little girl starts to cry.
“Get out of the middle of the floor, then,” her mother scolds.
A growl erupts from the little girl’s throat.
“Go to your room if you’re going to have an attitude,” her mom responds.
_____
“It appears that the documents are presented hoping the court will view them as prima facie evidence of a valid claim. The defendant will prove otherwise.”
-My grandpa, Jerry Olliff, Motion for Summary Judgement
“And so, I raise my sword.”
“All available forces to the front line.”
“You have activated my analysis.”
All lines from previous work pointing at the same damn reflex that Papa and I seem to have shared.
My version, an ever-expanding library of public essays that circulate beneath the airwaves and change how many interpret me.
His, at the very least, a thirteen-page court document submitted in a case he won without formal legal training.
Both, in far more words, stating,
What is being asserted doesn’t match the evidence presented,
and
I am liable to act on it at any time.
That’s almost a given response for large, obvious cases of abuse, misconduct, propaganda, but it is my stance that the cumulative, otherwise petty cases also warrant scrutiny, lest they fester in “the undercurrent of plausible deniability.”
Where their consequences land on the disbelieved.
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, labelling me as the problem for habitually gesturing toward falsehoods is how it gets one-hundred holes poked in it on the internet.
Observe.
_____
As our group bike ride passed another one on the same evening, as is common, my boyfriend encouraged any of those riders that wanted to go faster on their route to follow him.
The assumed ride leader of that group posted the following message on social media afterward:
“Word to the wise. Don’t show up to a group ride you bash every time and try to recruit people.”
For context, he and I both have made public comments about this particular group riding in a way that I still label as negligent, primarily from having observed riders regularly crossing to the left side of the road in turns and blind hills. That criticism has been dismissed multiple times. I was labelled as “cocky” the first time I addressed it.
For some reason, I chose to see if there was anything under the hood of that warning.
“Or what?” I commented.
What jurisdiction do you have?
“Genna, you are the biggest troll I have ever seen! I’m just making it clear to your boyfriend that I don’t play those games.”
And I am just making it known to you that nobody needs your permission.
“There was no sarcasm in that comment,” I replied again.
“Coming from you, I am definitely not worried. Follow-through is neither of your forte.”
Oh, this is ripe material. This looks like internet beef from the surface, but for someone like me, it goes:
You didn’t answer my question. I really want to know what you are going to do about this. Isn’t racing bikes all just a big game? Worried about what? Follow-through? What’s that all about?
Notice how the thread was immediately no longer about the subject at hand. It was about me.
It’s important to note that there is a history between this person and I. This is not the first time I challenged them on something and the conversation changed lanes toward everything that was wrong with me. But this time, two words were all it took to trigger that defense.
But hey, I’ll humor the implied criticism toward me anyway. There are a number of things that could be fairly gestured toward as “lacking follow-through.” I’ve done my fair share of brushing people off, deprioritizing responsibility and becomming focused on my own interests instead.
I’ve made public declarations for events I now can’t make happen, temporarily.
But I also have to point out that if I was more organized and had fewer interruptions,
I’d be a much bigger problem than I already am.
_____
Dear Papa,
Were you there when Mom said I should grow up to be an attorney because I love to argue so much? Wouldn’t you know it, I use courtroom metaphor in my writing and am unironically quoting from when you roleplayed one.
On that note, I especially liked it where you wrote,
“The judgement sought shall be rendered forthwith if the designated evidentiary matter shows there is no genuine issue as to any material fact, and that the moving party is entitled to a judgement as a matter of law.”
I’ve been told I need to grow up. When I do, I hope I can scare the shit out of a room that underestimated me like that.
Something I am left chewing on though is this–are the repeated criticisms of my character where I keep going wrong, or do they point at what makes me difficult to convince?
-Genna
I will the machine. 