I. I is the singular pronoun which represents the complete individual. Mind, body and soul. No one else can be an I. For me to call anyone else an I would equate me to saying someone else is exactly like me. I would equate me to saying that they are me. Who am I? I am I. No, that was not some cheap attempt at a Focault-ian Post Modernism cliche. I can only be who I am at any particular moment in time. I can only be what my own experiences, feelings and actions have been in the past, present and future. I cannot be Joan of Arc, because I have not experienced what she experienced. I cannot be Bozo the Clown, because I do not have the same feelings he feels. I cannot be Bill Clinton, because I have not acted how he has acted. The inverse is true. No one else can be me, no matter how hard someone imitates. I can only be me. I am I.

AM. The first person singular present indicative of BE. This little word locks the noun into a permanent state of being. To say I am something is to thrust myself into becoming that particular something. There is no middle ground when using the verb am. If used positively, you become the predicate. Used negatively (am not), then you do not become the predicate. One cannot say I maybe am or I possibly am. Grammatically and spiritually it just doesn't work. There can be no doubts when one uses the verb am. I am a baker. I am a tall person. I am a tuna. Am forces the noun to become the entitiy of a baker, a tall person, a tuna. If one wishes for ambiguity or indecisiveness, one would have to use the verb be. Might be. Possibly be. Could be. Would be. Should be. So many variations of that verb, yet there can be no variations with the verb am. Am is a very powerful verb, and can only be used with utmost certainty.

A. This little preposition is used to denote a single, specified thing or person. With the sentence I AM A WRITER., let's look at what it says when we apply all of the definitions defined thus far. I AM A WRITER equates to "My entire individual being (mind, body, and soul) is locked into becoming this specified, singular entity known as WRITER." No other preposition would be usable in such a case. Using the preposition the would thrust myself even further to being locked as a writer, as it denotes the only possible thing or person in existence. I am the writer, would indicate that I am "that writer which is only possible in existence." I don't have THAT much of an ego. It's rattling enough that I must be locked into only becoming a single entity devoted to writing, but to call myself the only possible writer in existence is ludicrous.

WRITER. Being a writer is a little more difficult to define. All of the other words are so much more defined, to much more limited in their connotations. WRITER; however, has many different meanings to every individual. So, I will be forced to use my own personal definition of a writer. A writer is one who conveys meaning with the written word. Yet, there is so much more to this definition, in my mind, than just conveying meaning. A writer has his own voice show through the words. A writer manipulates words to create something new. A writer must first envision something mentally, then put together in a certain order a set number of words to make the vision verbal, but then must make the words create the same vision within the reader's mind. I think these last aspects are the hesitating factors in allowing myself to say I AM A WRITER. I can write "I have gone to the store. I'll be back later." But, does that make me a writer? Of course not, yet, I clearly conveyed my meaning with written words. My problem was I had not yet developed my own voice. I hadn't learn how to create. I hadn't figured out how to pull the mental images out of my head, string words together, and see the images form within someone else's mind. To me, that's what being a writer is all about.

So then, up until a few years ago, I had not been able to call myself a writer. Why? Because I had nothing within my imagination for me to create. I had nothing anyone else would want to imagine. I hadn't lived yet. I was still being coddled by parents, friend, delusions of a perfect society. But, a few years ago, I changed all of that. I decided to quit college and begin my long hitchhiking trek across America. Was this influenced by Jack Kerouac's book The Dharma Bums or Bob Dylan's album Freewheelin' Bob Dylan? Maybe, maybe. Upon reflection, though, I think it had more to do with an innate desire to write, and I knew I couldn't do that without first living. My various hitchhiking treks from Chicago to San Francisco, from Los Angeles to Houston, from Dallas to New York would take ages for me to write down in this little essay. The best way to learn what I learned would be to read my various works here, on my web page, or on The State of unBeing E-Zine (my handle there is "The Super Realist"). I hope you get something out of my writings, and please, feel free to e-mail me with any comment, question, or criticism of my works.