Hey Brian,

Thank you for the ideas and understanding. I definitely think 'stealth' might be the tactic to follow also. However, I think my framing as to what kind of stealth such a tactic follows might be a bit different than your own.

Let me put it this way: given so much of my time has already been spent being (generous) with... 'my time,' and that I am seemingly being challenged for having done so-and giving what I've experienced of women- I'm simply not impressed into thinking 'your' idea of 'stealth' realized as 'just ignoring her,' gives this issue its proper resolution or due merit.

Not that it's a bad idea, mind you, I just feel as if most women are all too knowledgeable and keen to such a tactic. So much so, I'm hard pressed to believe even the most inert wouldn't be able to identify such a move were being implemented against them... Hell, they probably even imagine such tactics are being thrown at them even when they aren't-which would explain so many's inherent paranoia. (Maybe that's the trade off for being so sensitive to being ignored.) Not to mention it seems to me women are just better faceted for putting up with such a gambit were I to send it off... or not send one off, as ignoring someone would require.

I wonder if that is like- an evolutionary trait women have developed on account of dealing with men for so long.

That makes me quite empathetic towards all past and present socially repressed and closeted lesbians forced/expected to marry men and deal with something-were 

they allowed to follow their instincts without repercussions-they wouldn't have had to deal with in the first place.

Anyhow, I just can't have anything to do with something that doesn't stand a decent chance of working, Brian. 

No half measures, my friend.

"No more 'I love you's." as Annie Lennox once sang... Not that I'm writing this woman that I love her... to be clear.

Instead I was thinking 'stealth' would be better fashioned if it had some, whatcha might call 'shiftiness' to it. I'm talking/writing about getting behind some of that light refractive type 'stealth,' but not the sort that only affects the eye. It also had to trick the mind... 

Some of that Hans Christian Anderson 'David Copperfield,' slight of hand type stealth. You know the kind that will correctly/'literarily' literally confuse the Dickens out of her.

So what am I even writing 'about,' you may ask. 

Here is what I propose:

Now I know you aren't of any real desire to write this woman; at least that is what I am inferring, but what do you think about me writing what I want to write, sending it your way and then you paraphrasing what I just sent you in your own way of saying/writing what I sent and then you sending it back to me to write in my own hand so as to return to you so you can forward it on to her from 'your' address.

It'll totally tatter her mind.

Switch up the styles, switch up the address. 

Switch up the game she doesn't even know she's playing.

Stealthy.

Now, incase this is confusing the hell out of you, consider for a moment: if the 'explanation' of said 'my' stealthy gambit is confusing you as you read it, just imagine how thoroughly it will confuse the person its being instigated upon. 

Now, 'What's the point?' you might also be asking yourself. The point is, she doesn't know your particular style, my friend. And since she'll be looking to take advantage of the styles she has already poured valuable learning and studying time into emulating-mine- she'll hardly be able to adapt to or directly identify what's going on if we're supplying her with a foreign paraphrasing of it.

It's like I wrote you earlier; near the elaborate piece of artwork you apparently didn't notice of; if lack of a comment about it in your latest serves as any evidence.

'Play the opposite.'

'The Anti-thesis'

'Criss Cross.'

The only problem I can foresee-besides the time I invest on artwork that goes unappreciated-is if she is so good as to adapt to that also. We can't underestimate she might just be some sort of savant tactician. For if history and experience has taught us anything it's 

that women have surprises. That's why we have to think three or four steps ahead at all times, from here on out. 

With that being noted, I think it almost goes without being written there are only so many letters we can trade back and forth between one another before I imagine she'll catch on. Once that happens, and she identifies and learns the new respective styles we've employed, I can only surmise she'd then turn to trying to use them against us also. 

She is in prison after all and thereby has the advantage of 'more free time' to invest in such endeavors.

So, with that in mind, I'd say it's safe to assume we should be good for at least two-no more than three-letters, before we need to switch to someone else for a style/paraphrasing change.

'Criss 'Cross' Cross'

-Unless she is much better at this than I think and three is too many...

-No, we should be good with three. 

Shoot, I didn't consider the fact these new people we switch to would also have to be other Brian Dykemans. We can't simply 'only' change up style every few letters if we already set the precedent to also change up the address.

But how am I gonna meet any more Brian Dykemans any time soon? Not to mention the time it'd take to build up the proper amount of good will and decorum it requires to have the same sort of relationship we enjoy? It took thirty one plus years to run into you. Not to mention we might not get along as well as the two of us do, usage of a person's mailing address to plot and connive a seeming sensitive subject in these times.

Thanks a lot Kaczynski.

Do you know any other Brian Dykemans?

Maybe getting the relationships just 'good enough' to put concern for Unabomber tendencies to rest would garner trust enough to have them send what I write from their addresses. I suppose we'll just have to proactively work on this until we have it all sorted. Point is, she'll think the Brian Dykeman that isn't you or me 'is' me. And so on ad infin(as many Brian Dykemans as there are and that I can befriend)um.

We'll basically have her thinking any of our particular styles is my new and constantly evolving style. And that 

will certainly keep her confused in regards to what she has already learned and studied from me. 

Hence she won't be able to keep up with the very game she herself decided to instigate.

So, with that idea established, I'd say its safe to say, once we're able to get this off the ground, I bet we get at least like- eight to ten- maybe twelve additional letters written-instead of the two to three between you and me-before she figures anything out. 

But then again, maybe simply switching styles isn't convoluted enough.

Maybe throughout this whole thing we also send her like- facts and knowledge about the world that isn't factual or real, so then when she finally does get out of jail, like- boom! She'll only know the false stuff we sent her. 

It's like- the most harmful, non-violent, non-chargeable form of social terrorism that exists. And if Marine Corps brainwashing taught us anything it's that the non-tangible-that doesn't relate to money-can't be charged in a court of law, you know? If it could, Mainstream media and our government would be done, right? They do it every day. Consider the fact the only thing the Marine Corps has ever really had to pay for-to my knowledge-was the Camp Lejeune water poisoning. But that's tangible harm, see? You can't get off on that. 

So the whole thing could be like- this really subvert 'long con' sort of conniving. 

(That's what the 'con' in 

'con' is short for after all, right?)

See! Right there. That's the kind of false information we could feed her- you could feed her- the other Brian Dykeman's could feed her. We could call it ''Brian' Washing.'

Best of all she already thinks she has 'me' on the hook, so right there we got her since she already has a pre-established belief. And she'll cling to that because she knows no better on account of this has to be the first time anything like this has ever been done.

(Specifically with Brian Dykemans anyway; what with one of the most unoriginal ideas being to have an original idea so forth )

Criss 'Criss' Cross.

Play the opposite of the opposite.

I like this already. 

I'll show her for turning on my good graces and we'll do it by letting her think the world she's returning to is completely different than it actually is. 

It's perfect. 

Write back soon so we can get deeper into the details and further along with the planning and logistics. 

In the mean time I'll adjust a letter-I began in my original style, but held off completing so as to see where we were going to land-for applicable windage to keep her on her toes. Which should buy us more time to figured this out.

Just remember we can't let her get the advantage. And believe me when I tell you, she knows how to spot things and in turn, take it and use it against me- us.

It's time to turn the tables, sir.

-Brian

">
CHANNILLO

Brian (w)'s Fifth Letter to Brian (e)
Series Info | Table of Contents

 Hey Brian,

Thank you for the ideas and understanding. I definitely think 'stealth' might be the tactic to follow also. However, I think my framing as to what kind of stealth such a tactic follows might be a bit different than your own.

Let me put it this way: given so much of my time has already been spent being (generous) with... 'my time,' and that I am seemingly being challenged for having done so-and giving what I've experienced of women- I'm simply not impressed into thinking 'your' idea of 'stealth' realized as 'just ignoring her,' gives this issue its proper resolution or due merit.

Not that it's a bad idea, m...

Please subscribe to keep reading.

Table of Contents

Series Info