I wish to be an absence, and I wish for the actress Talitha Bateman to be a presence. And this is in relation to the universe; Bateman should be the only real presence in the universe, and I should be the only real absence in the universe.

To be an absence, it occurs to me that some sort of gesture is necessary. I can’t literally become an absence, and so to amend this inability, the Iraq War from 2003 can be the way in which I bridge the gap between myself and my desire to be absent.

The Iraq War is not a living being. Bateman is a living being, and I am a living being, but the 2003 invasion of Iraq and the subsequent war until 2011 – or thereabouts – is an event – and an event is a series of actions.

A series of actions is a non-series of non-actions; a non-series is a non-sequence, and a non-sequence is a non-structure. Meanwhile, non-actions are non-movements. Non-movements are numerous origins, and numerous origins is the equivalent of one aftermath.

The Iraq War is a non-structure of one aftermath – a structure of reactions. A structure of reactions is a reaction to no difference; a reaction to no difference is a reaction to equality.

Lastly: a reaction to equality is an equal origin. And an equal origin is an unequal reaction – a judgement which is superior.

As things stand, I’ve elected the Iraq War to be a way for me to prevent my failure to be absent, and in doing so I’ve associated the means of justification with a judgement which is superior – but what is the actual meaning, of the connection between a judgement which is superior and a means of justification?

To begin with, a judgement that’s superior can just be an inferiority. And then once a means of justification is altered into a non-justification, the issue is much simpler: the meaning of the connection between an inferiority and a non-justification – ergo, the meaning of the connection between an inferiority and an inferiority.

The connection between an inferiority and an inferiority isn’t the same as between an inferiority and an inferiority, which would make the connection between an inferiority and an inferiority an inferiority and an inferiority. An inferiority and an inferiority is a superiority, however, it’s a superiority which is the conflict of being a superiority because of the power of a repeated inferiority and a superiority because of the general rule that repetition can’t honour the original identity.

The Iraq War is a power that’s because that power has honoured and betrayed the same thing. A power that’s a power because it honours and betrays the same thing is a power that’s incorrect because it only honours the same thing; a power that’s incorrect is correct, and a correct that only honours the same thing is a correct that betrays different things.

A correct that betrays different things is a correct that betrays non-things – a correct that betrays non-things is a thing that is a betrayal of the correct.

The Iraq War is a thing – or a series of actions or a series of things, either amount to the same thing – and it is a thing which is famous for being a betrayal – although the exact nature of the Iraq War is far more intricate than that.

More curiously, but perhaps not famously – otherwise that would involve a lot of subversive egotism – the Iraq War is a part of history that means a technical error. By technical error, the implication is that in general, warfare, nationalism and the protection of capitalist systems can be exempt from their natural state of being corrupt.

Either through magic, or through nothing but the cold and clinical art of deductive logic, it’s the 2003-2011 Iraq War which has the natural ability to call to me: not outer space, not music, not the countryside, not the farm life and not the American people – the Iraq War.

So I can use the Iraq War, that’s been established. But what now?

At the beginning, I said that I wanted to be an absence, so that Talitha Bateman can be a presence. The Iraq War can’t be a presence, because that violates Talitha Bateman’s ability to be a presence. Thus, the Iraq War needs to be something which is neither a presence or absence; the opposite of a presence and absence is the opposite of alternation. The opposite of alternation is non-change.

Non-change is permanence. Permanence is the absence of instability, and the absence of instability is the absence of corruption – the Iraq War is the epitome of corruption, and thus, it is a suitable agent to permit Talitha Bateman to become the only real presence in the universe, and to permit me to become the only real absence in the universe.

Talitha Bateman was the star of the 2017 horror spin-off/prequel Annabelle Creation. Her character, Janice, is why I’ve felt the need to reference the Iraq War; as hard as it is to admit, my desire to be a father to Talitha Bateman seems to have just been a way for the Iraq War to defeat Janice.

Even if this is true, it won’t prevent me from my ability to extend this writing to Bateman herself.

To Talitha Bateman: thank you, for your performance in Annabelle Creation and for your ability to help me become reality