Love/Hate

•July 12, 2009 • 2 Comments

I love trees. There is nothing that I have more consistently loved stronger than trees. Climbing trees was the one bad habit my parents could never cure me of when I was little. I remember coming home from a day of play with my hands stained with sap from the pine tree wood in our backyard. This probably caused my mother numberless headaches. I probably didn’t care. Setting my life on the length of a limb and swaying full feet as I looked down on the world below was an experience that could not be traded away for parental pleasure. The sap wasn’t an inconvenience; it was proof of a great deed done.

The writings of Tolkien and Hopkins have endeared trees to me, and also rustled up a bit of sympathy for their plight in the modern world. Modernity seems decidedly anti-tree. Trees are patient beings, and take a long time to turn into beautiful, useful things that can provide enough fruit and shade and oxygen to warrant their existence to the present generation. 

There is a sapling in my apartment. It’s growing through a crack in the molding by the floor. I have no idea where its roots lead to, but I’ve decided to let it grow, despite whatever damage it might do to the wall it grows from. The image is simply too beautiful, too inspiringly perfect for me to squelch: life shooting through lifelessness, asserting itself, absurd as it is, in the patch of sunlight provided by my living room window. God bless that damn tree. I hope it grows ceaselessly.

 

Hate. Hm. Hate is harder. I was certainly raised in such a way that to hate a thing, even if that thing deserves hatred, still feels a bit foreign. I can remember the elementary Sunday school conversations, my classmates and I besting our infantile philosophic wits: “Do you hate anything?” “No.” What about the devil?” “Oh.” And so we learned that hate might be okay. I’m not sure the lesson ever took root though. We’re a polite culture, obscenely polite, and the thought of hating a single thing seems unbalanced…a little too dangerous for a proper man or woman, especially if they are a man or woman of God. 

Of course, that’s probably all bunk. There are things I ought to hate, and I know I ought to hate them: sin, injustice, the needless deaths of third-world children, mindlessness…and there are times when I get right riled up about those things. But in the end, it is the tendency of my polite mind to simmer that hatred down to a digestible, agreeable heat. To disagree with something too strong brands one an extremist, and that is a dangerous thing to be. Of course, if we were all committed to vocalizing our hatreds as we are about hiding them, we may actually see some really exciting things happen from time to time. Then again, that seems reckless in a lot of ways, too. Is there such a thing as constructive hatred? Hm. *Ponder*.

5

•July 12, 2009 • Leave a Comment

For some reason, when I think of 5, there’s one thing that I just can’t escape, and that thing has certainly earned itself a sinister reputation in Christian circles. That’s right, ladies and gents, I’m talking about the pentagram.

Dan Brown did an adequate job in THE DAVINCI CODE with debunking the myth that the pentagram is inherently evil. In reality, it is a somewhat beautiful symbol…probably one of the reasons why it has been used to represent one of the most beautiful things we know, the star. Interesting, too, that the two Judeo-Christian stars, the Star of David and the Star of Bethlehem, are six- and four-pointed, respectively.

In the days of my youth (and adolescence…and adulthood…sigh) I played a lot of fantasy roleplaying/action games. I dig the genre. And, of course, part of a general education in said genre is an understanding of the five elements, which play a role in a whole heckuva lot of games. Fire, Wood, Water, Earth, Metal is one list; others substitute Air variously. Either way, though, I’ve always been intrigued by the neatness of these primordial schemas for understanding the substance of Creation. 

For instance, there was Thales, a pre-Socratic philosopher who thought that everything in the universe consisted of water. Hericlitus saw in Fire the foundational principle of constant change that, to him, defined the nature of existence. Hundreds upon thousands of generations have found joy in the riches of what Tolkien’s Hobbits loved: “Good tilled earth.” 

There does seems to be something about these basic building blocks of the universe that appeals more to the human mind than the periodic tables. Maybe they are echoes of a simpler, pre-scientific time (if such a time can be said to have existed) when the make-up of things wasn’t quite as complex. Maybe there’s something attractive to the balance of interaction between the elements…one can much easier perceive the effects of mixing Water and Fire than chlorine and potassium. 

And so, perhaps at the risk of being accused of occultic influence, I’ll still maintain that, as I writer, I find the five elements (whatever five you choose) to be imbued with a kind of magic…the kind that is in all material creation, but also the kind that has been developed by the accumulation of enough meaning to make each one rich with impression. We know exactly what is meant when a character has “a spirit of fire” or “an airy voice.” If a character’s hands are stained with earth, we know something about his or her priorities in life. There’s something magical invoked when we introduce the stuff of Creation into writing. I like that latent meaning. It’s good, strong stuff, striking the same chord in me as BEOWULF does…clear, vibrant, maybe not all that subtle, but beautiful in its straightforwardness, nonetheless.

4

•July 8, 2009 • 2 Comments

If 3 is a number resplendent with magical significance, 4 is, at least to me, the exact opposite. Something about 4 feels quite drab and pedestrian. It seems to me to be a number of logic and organization, a distinctly left-brained conception.

Consider: the Cartesian coordinate system works on a quadratic schema. There are the four quadrants, and, excluding the origin, there are four possible directions to go: up or down either X or Y. 

Also, the four cardinal directions. Although they were designed to navigate a flat world, they still serve as a means to give direction in our curved world. Even the intermediate directions (NW, SW, NE, SE), are four in number, and the system breaks down into smaller sets of four as you become more precise.

Also, consider the four possible movements one can make when we give directions somewhere: Forward, Backward, Left, and Right. Anything else (slight left, sharp right, etc.) is tacked onto these four standard movements.

Interesting that, in all of these, direction is the foundational principle. Granted, there are sets of 4 that do not carry this connotation…but it seems significant, nonetheless.

The cardinal directions are interesting things in and of themselves. They each have their connotations, probably slightly different from person to person.

My associations are as follows:

East – To the Christian, the East is traditionally the direction from which Christ arrives at his Second Coming; the direction of sunrise; what else can it mean but hope? It is brightness, clean and piercing. 

West – The west carries similar connotations as the fall seasons: expiring, closing-out, the final breaths of day (sunset)…there is something elegaic about the west.

North – Cold, whiteness, death. Perhaps this is a uniquely northern-hemisphere perspective, but it’s also something that I’ve found in a lot of reading, too…then again, most Western books have been written by northern hemisphere writers. Interesting how place informs how we think about things.

South – The opposite of North, basically…balmy, warm, tropic. Interesting, all I think of is weather. Huh.

…To be honest, I’m not quite sure what to make of 4. I’m mostly just rambling at this point. It’s a weirdly illusive number. I dunno, what do you guys think 4 means?

Numbers…

•July 3, 2009 • Leave a Comment

I’m going to be out of town for the rest of the weekend, away from internet access, so 4 and 5 will be coming later, maybe Sunday-ish. Just FYI.

3

•July 1, 2009 • 2 Comments

3 is a magical number. If 1 is wholeness, and 2 is differentiation, what’s 3? Balance, perhaps? A two-legged stool can’t stand (although a two-legged human can). There are the three pillars of the Church, the three Persons of God, the three great virtues listed by Paul (faith, hope, and love). Tragedy comes in threes (recent celebrity deaths), the third time’s the charm, and genies will grant you three wishes if you rub their lamp the right way.

It seems like completion is a strand that runs through these appearances of 3 in our idiomatic heritage. 

I think, of course, about the Trinity. One theologian says that the love between the Father and Son necessitated another Person of the Trinity to observe that love, and so, the Holy Spirit. Conclusion: relationship is only full if it is shared by the external.

This makes some sense. I am never so happy with my relationship with Brittany as when others are happy about our relationship…when we not only experience each other’s love, but allow others to experience it as well (without being obnoxious, of course). Pairings in and of themselves might not be quite enough. I find that in a lot of pairings, you find a shadowy third party anyways. Man and wife…and God (or child). Black and white…and gray. Sun and moon…and stars. The third party always intrudes into the tidy polar diads that we set up. 

3 is the number of complication. It makes you have to weigh your options. If you only have to choose between two things, it’s easy…just pick one you like more than the other. But when you have to choose between three things, the process becomes significantly more complicated. Liking one better than the other doesn’t necessarily mean it’s the best of the three. You have to weigh the options. Hold things in context. Survey the landscape.

In short, I think that 3 makes it possible to live in this world. The ability to see a third option, a third path, a middle way, perhaps, is something that I’ve found to be an admirable characteristic of some of my favorite people. Calm, collected, they don’t rush to one side or the other, but ask the right questions, weigh the options, and often see the road that no one thought to take. 

3 is an odd number. Literally, and figuratively. It opens up the doors to so many adventures, as fairy tales have told us. A beautiful number, 3.

2

•June 30, 2009 • 2 Comments

You know, I started off thinking about specific ideas related to numbers…real concrete things like “sun, moon, and star” for 3 or N, S, E, W for 4. But I’m kinda digging thinking about numbers as abstract concepts, the things they imply rather than the specific things they might describe or by which they might be represented. So I’m gonna stick to that plan. Hurrah for abstraction, at least this week!

 

2 – the second number in sequence, the principle of nextness, otherness, separation. It establishes sequence. Without 2, there is only 1, the whole, the single thing. The moment you count to 2, you proclaim the possibility that there could be one thing that is not like the other. 2 makes thought possible.

I remember reading somewhere in the vast avalanche of college texts that some psychologists believe that we primarily learn through establishing difference. For example, imagine that I two objects, say two balls, that were the same in every way except for the fact that one was red and one was blue. We recognize that they are different, and so we assign names to their difference: “blue” and “red.” Now we have to abstract concepts, “blue” and “red” that we can now apply to other objects that are also differentiated from other objects by that difference (along with others). Difference leads to abstraction, which in turn leads to the human mind’s ability to categorize and label things.

In my Medieval Philosophy course at Akron University, I picked up a handy definition of “definition”: genus + specific difference. For example, Man belongs to the genus “animal,” but he is differentiated from all other animals in that he thinks. Therefore, Man is defined as “a thinking animal.” 

I’ve tried to imagine a world in which this ability to differentiate didn’t exist…in which all things are one. Sounds kind of New Agey, right? Well, maybe that’s why I don’t buy into the New Age stuff. God isn’t someone whose one-ness we’re absorbed into. To be “holy” means to be “apart”…we and God are separate, different…like 1 and 2, blue and red.

But 1 and 2 can work together to make 3. Blue and red make purple. God and humankind make…well, it’s probably not as simple as 3 or purple, but they sure make something. Relationship, maybe? 

Yeah, something like that. Because in order to have relationship, you must have two things. A thing can’t relate to itself. If we think we relate to ourselves, it is probably only because we are constructing some “other” self that is not quite ourself, if you know what I mean…call it an “ideal” self, or maybe the “looking-glass self”…whatever it is, it’s not our real self, and being as such, it isn’t us. 

So is it any wonder that a wellspring of relationship blossoms out of pairings? Day and night, male and female, young and old, conservative and liberal…sure, binary relationships can be constricting and often divisive, but they are also a good way of exploring the conflict (not necessarily negative conflict) that arises by being part of a Created Order that thrives of difference. 

Finally, this: it stands to reason that the more difference we encounter, the more we can relate and connect to things, right? Encounter…not always embrace, for sure, but at least encounter. So why does the Church keep such a tight leash on its members, sometimes? I am sure that we do it out of protection…there is always the risk that one might embrace a difference that is actually a departure from holiness, and thereby lose something bright and sacred, perhaps. But maybe it’s worth the risk, on an institutional level, to let loose a bit and go encounter some bloody differences already! Because how can you know that white is white unless you’ve seen something that’s not white? You can’t. We know things because they are different from the rest.

“They will know we are Christians by our love.” That’s a statement of difference. Separation. Otherness. But it doesn’t mean we can’t mix in with the 1s just because we’re 2s…it’s what God does for us, at least.

1

•June 29, 2009 • 4 Comments

I’ve been thinking today about the place of “1″ in a sequence. Most commonly, 1 is used to represent the first of something. We begin counting, “1, 2, 3, 4…” and continue onward, but as we count we get further and further away in time and space from 1. 

I typed “1″ in the Wikipedia search bar just to see what it would give me, and it gave me an entry on the year 1 AD. In case you’re wondering, it’s the year that the Roman Emperor Tiberius quelled revolts in Germany, the year Ovid wrote The Metamorphoses, and, of course, the year that Jesus was traditionally said to be born. The sense of removal from these events is vast. If 1 is the origin (at least of the rule of years), then we are far indeed from 1. A little over 730,000 days, to be exact. 

This has some significance to the Christian, I suppose. All our history lies…well, where all history lies: in the past. We are moving daily away from a fixed span of time that contains the incarnation, life, death, and resurrection of a third of our Godhead, the chronological crux upon which the entirety of human-divine interaction hinges. Things are becomming fuzzy, it seems. In the last few decades, the historicity of Jesus’s life as presented in the Gospels has been called into question, because we believe that our vantage point offers us a clearer historical perspective than the two millenia prior have seen.

There is, perhaps, some merit to this. Distance from the beginning helps one to see the beginning in relation to all that has followed…we see the forest for the trees. But we also miss some of the details of the trees, too.

I have a friend at Malone who is an avid reader of the early church theologians. While I’ve found numerous occasions to disagree with him on theological matters, I’m always impressed by his ability to cite the patriachs of the Christian faith so knowledgeably and accurately. What’s strange, though, is that the shape of faith that they speak of is so vastly different than ours. The further you are from the beginning, the less you are like it, perhaps.

And yet there’s this great inversion in Christianity, too: there is a fixed end towards which we travel, and so, in a sense, along with counting up, we’re also counting down. “4…3…2..1…”…and then? Impact. We touch down. We land where we are meant to land. We are who we are meant to be. So 1 is destination, the end point, the conclusion. 

So what does it mean, that we are at once growing away from the historical facts of the Gospels but towards the historical realization of its promises. We muddle the facts about the life of Jesus, often missing the implications, overlooking the subtleties that a vast removal in context has left us all but incapable of deciphering. And yet, our individual lives are one long straining for sanctification, a process of refining that shapes us to be more like Christ, if we suffer the flesh to break and be molded. And as a Church? That I don’t know. Is there a static image of what the Church is supposed to look like? And if so, are we moving away from it, or moving towards it? Or is there no static image, is it really just a gelatinous glob of love and holiness and worship that fills the cracks of the context it finds itself in?

3, 2, 1…

1, 2, 3…

Just like God to write chiasmuses into our lives.

The first shall be last, the last shall be first.

The rich are poor, the poor are rich.  

The end is the beginning.

The beginning is the end. 

1 = 1.

Discipline Update

•June 29, 2009 • 3 Comments

So…I have a hard time with that whole discipline thing. I’ve found myself rationalizing a whole heckuva lot of things a whole heckuva lot lately. One of those things have been days without writing. One thing that I’ve gained in the past year (though I wish I hadn’t discovered it) is a deep faith in my ability to rationalize pretty much anything and make it okay in my head. On days like yesteryday, where I woke up early, went to church, proceeded directly to work, and was dog-tired after working, it’s hard to remember why I even want to remain discipline enough to sit down, even if it’s just for an hour, to write. 

Instead, I’m finding out that my output is coming in short, “inspired” bursts, when I have an empty afternoon and I just happen to “feel like” writing. Therein, I think, lies the real problem, too – that it’s hard for me to sit down at the computer and write if I don’t “feel like it.” But the funny thing is that I know that I’ve managed to make myself feel like it on those days when I’ve just made myself do it. So that “feel like it” thing is inconsequential, and probably only really happens after I feel dedicated to the process in some way. 

Part of the trouble has been that my work schedule has made my planned writing schedule impossible, so I’ve been adjusting, shifting days and such…which always short-changes oneself. That’s probably just gotta stop. 

That said, I have increased in productivity this week, even if I feel behind the curve. I let myself swing a bit loose so far. I’m done doing that. I’ve got plenty of ideas now, to, so I should have plenty to feed on for a little while. 

It’s funny…all this time, I had thought this kind of guilt was particular to Sunday school, when you’re told, in nicer words, that you haven’t been reading your Bible enough to really know God.

Some Stuff About Some Things…

•June 26, 2009 • 3 Comments

Is anybody else just loving the heck out of “38 Fiction Writing Mistakes”…or whatever the title is, I don’t have the book near me at the moment. I really am digging pretty much everything the guy is saying. I mean, granted, his tone has been a little persnickety sometimes, but I think I sometimes need that whole wrecking-ball teaching style to get truth through my brick wall of a skull.

One of the things that I’m realizing the most as I read through (I’m on #12 right now) is the importance of reader-centrism (a word?) in fiction-writing. Everything more or less comes down to giving the reader what they want. Of course, there are a variety of readers, so the conventions change from time to time, but the overall sense of what makes good writing seems to remain the same. I was also particularly struck by his command that no one should bash a published author. Working at Borders, this can be kind of tough, especially when one can tell right away from the cover of a thing that it’s something you wouldn’t want to read…but then again, they’re published, and I’m not, so…there you go.

More than anything that’s stuck with me though is the adage “writers write, everyone else makes excuses.” It’s been said before, but it’s really starting to stick this time. I’ve been disappointed with my lack of discipline to this point. It’s more than it’s ever been before, but it’s still not to the point where I’m putting out as much as I expect myself to be doing for this class, or for my own enjoyment, for that matter.

Good news is, I’ve been coming up with a lot of revisions for the sci-fi story, and I’m liking the direction that it’s starting to go in my head. Tomorrow I’ve planned myself a nice 3-hour chunk of writing time where I’m going to start revising and adding and seeing where the story takes me next. Granted, the time my get usurped by some new and unexpected inspiration, but that’s been running rather dry lately, and revision’s feeling hopeful right now.

Short Story Update [1]

•June 18, 2009 • 1 Comment

Okay, so I plugged at the short story concept a bit more and got a bit more than 500 words. I’m posting it here in case anybody feels generous enough to give me any pointers, since fiction is new and scary and slightly impossible at this moment in time. For a general plot summary, check two posts back.

 

P.S. Yes, there’s a fair amount of cursing herein, and while it’s against my personal ethic to engage in such without proper cause…well, I think there’s proper cause here. The times that I’ve used “bad” language, I’ve tried to make it consistent with the character’s voice, or at least the narrative style that tends to define the cyber-punk genre. Of course, if you can think of any alternative wordings that wouldn’t sacrifice the feel of the thing, let me know, I’m open to changes. 

 

 

Looking down on the sprawl, you can swear it’s on fire. From horizon to horizon spreads the endless incandescent swell, the thin lines of shimmering light running under and into and out of the boroughs, warrens, the massive arcologies and company towers that rise like impossible mountains of burning yellow, blue and white. “The sky over NAC has never been black,” they will say, and they do so with pride; as long as anyone can remember, the view upward has been the same warm haze, sometimes cast on the underbellies of rolling clouds, sometimes stretching out evenly, a blanket over a city that has no need for sleep. They have no memory of the Outage now, though most were born early enough to have witnessed it – like everything in Arco, its history has been absorbed by the streets.

 

Sully started small-time, popping neon streetlights with a pellet gun from the back seat of Jack Ephraim’s black Honda two-door. Together they tore down the empty side avenues, Jack with two hands on the wheel and eyes on the rearview, watching Sully pivot the electric-blue pistol as they sped past each lamppost, then the crack of the gun and a pop overhead, and a second later, the sound of bulbglass splashing into the pavement. It was only for fun, then, no real plan, no method to the madness. Sully may have caught his breath once or twice at the shower of sparks or the flower of shards that sprung up from the pavement at the point of impact, but it was nothing spiritual, nothing holy, none of that Order of Saints shit, just a good time on an empty night. Jack, he hardly ever bothered to look.

When Sully was fifteen Jack died, wrapping his Honda around a telephone pole going a-hundred-and-ten down Magister Boulevard. They found his lank body slumped in a mangled heap thirty feet from the wreckage, a clownish grin still stamped on his melon-rind of a face. Sully stopped shooting lights for a while, stopped going out at all. He tended his homework minded his mother, biding his time until he could get his ass out of topside. After graduation he searched for months until he found a job in the city servicing elevator shafts that were the main thoroughfares between the topside arcologies and Arco’s vast urban undergrowth, the organic networks of neon-laced slums that grew like algae around the massive bases of the corporate titans. The light wasn’t as oppressive down there; the glow off the platforms still kept it bathed in a perpetual twilight, but there were corners, shadows, islands where, for a moment, one could feel forgotten.

He moved into a room near the base of the main tube circuit. The apartment was cramped and the job was shit, but it opened up a new world to him. Up until then he had only been topside, where the sons and daughters of the company families, his deceased father among them, were given reasonably bland pre-fab apartments in subsidiary towers in exchange for a lifetime of mind-numbing service. Pinkerton Place, his former home, had been as such, all concrete blocks and outdated upholstery. The kind of place where kids shot at light fixtures from the back seats of speeding cars and called it sin. The underside represented a whole new kind of frenzy, a crude web of business and pleasure left to fester unchecked by the authorities – as far as they were concerned, nothing existed beneath the platforms. Not a blip on the radar. Civilization blackout.

 

Tramp’s was authentic, not like the sham joints that brought down slummers for a weekend thrill. Collie’s was like that, and The Red Dog too – doctored up in contrived seediness, pretentious as hell; no real undersider would be caught dead there unless they were hoping to scam some topside snob out of a credit or two. The real places, the ones that belonged down here, were a tenth as slimy and three times as dangerous. Places like Tramp’s were where the real biz happened, the drug trades, the contracts, the escort services, kept tight under a lid of respectability that smacked of hard-bitten underside pride.

Sully sat at the clean-kempt bar inside Tramp’s, nursing a drink that had no name and bit the throat like liquid fire. It had taken Sully three years to punch past the sleazy veneer of the tourist traps and into the real heart of the play, the dance of the street that swept by unnoticed if you didn’t keep your eyes peeled. But now he was in. Tonight, if he was lucky.

“Good bite, yeah?” asked Creed, who was tending bar that night, like every night for as long as Sully had been coming here.

Sully nodded mutely. He could barely hear Creed over the thick stream of amalgamated synth-pop that bled from every corner of the room.

“You know that juice’ll curdle your blood in a month if you keep it up.” Creed grinned, white enamel glowing blacklit neon through the African darkness of his sweaty face.

“No shit?”

“No shit. Illegal up top. Medical who’s-whos won’t let it up. Say it makes you see things you never seen before, right before it shrivels your heart and sends you back to the Maker.”

Sully grimaced as he took another swig. Creed huffed at him quietly, more out of habit than of any real concern, then disappeared through a door behind the bar. Only after he downed the last dregs in a final gulp did Sully notice the presence looming over his right shoulder.

“Good evening, Sullivan.” A dry, precise voice, deep and careful.

Sully swiveled on the bar stool. “Jesus, man, you always do that?”

“Do what?”

“Creep up like that? You did that last time.”

“I’m afraid I wouldn’t be very good at my job if I did not.” The monolith of a man stood unmoving, his eyes hidden behind a strip of mirrored shades. He was impossibly big; there was no doubt in Sully’s mind that he used, and used often. No way a bicep could grow that huge without some serious derming. Intimidating as hell.

“Look, man,” Sully said, motioning to the bar stool next to him, “why don’t you take a seat? I’m not all about getting towered over, you know?” The man grunted and sat down, eliciting a metallic groan from the bar stool beneath his ponderous bulk.

“So what’s the Clinch say?” Sully asked, then cursed himself for not biting back his eagerness.

“The Clinch says you’re in.”

“In when?”

“Tonight.”

“Tonight? Shit. What’s the game?”

“You are to meet at the utility shafts at midnight, number 14. You are to wear black. No weapons, no chemicals, nothing that could cause you problems if you get caught. Understood?”

“Hell, yeah,” Sully said, the quiver in his voice hard to suppress.

“This is a one-time run, a job from up top. He’s offering good money if it’s pulled off right, just right.” Sully nodded. It sounded like the kind of thing he’d heard of before: mid-level corporates with a little extra cash wanting to feel dangerous without being in danger, so they outsourced their schemes to underbelly junkies who needed cash for a fix. The doers get their high, the toppers get their rush, and everybody goes home happy.

“The Clinch thinks you can handle this one, Sullivan,” the man said, face unmoving, expression blank. “You have potential, he says. He wants to see it…bloom, he says. I do not know the word, but he said you would understand.” He did understand. Plants were a topside thing. His mother’s garden, though never successful, was one of the only things he missed about living up there.

“Tell the Clinch I appreciate the gesture,” said Sully, smirking. He was in. “Anything else?”

“No, Sullivan.”

“Midnight, number 14?”

“Yes, Sullivan.”

“Good.” Sully slid lightly off the stool, the metal wringing as he strode towards the doorway.

            “One more thing, Sullivan.” Sully halted, heard the bar stool swivel. “The Clinch says he does not believe you when you say that you are in this for the money. He says that his sources tell him that you are comfortable enough, that you do not have a habit, that you do not have any expensive…tastes. He wants to know: where is your interest in his game?”

            Sully stood at the entrance, his back to the behemoth, looking down at his shoes for a few seconds. He clinched his fist, slipped a hand in his jacket pocket, thumbed something thin and hard there. Then, without answering, he walked through the door and into the undercity night that was not night.