He is who is he is as I have said before about others in one or another circumstance. Who he is when he is where he is how he is–I am who I am even if I forget who I am, not necessarily from amnesia but how everyone forgets himself from time to time. What does he do or does he not do? He does many things that do not require him to have a name, an identity may not be exactly the same thing . . . terrorists with fake passports have identities, no? To be or not to be by becoming what? He asks, as he has before, always before, no one is in illo tempore ab origine, he says, he becomes; to come to be who he is what he has been–he suggests he has always been–when is the original self trying to follow its nature? Do you imagine there is an original nature, all of it in that time out of origins, you know how all cultures used to be about eternal return, history and cosmos, the cosmogonies we live by–we must live by them–who do you imagine you are, will be when faced with the end time. I have always answered this question with a resounding Me–I am I. Even if I had amnesia, I would still be me. What else is there to be? I am not waiting for some me to arrive or think of myself as a destination I have to reach before I get to be, whereby I would be perpetually wholly becoming without any being. That’s just a load of shit. I am and I become. To be and not to be is just that. I am being and I am becoming, simultaneously, mutually, reciprocally, without one displacing the existence of the other, although only one can be perceived at a time?