The prospect that metaphors are a threat to atoms is an outlandish one. In the real world, people wouldn’t feel that such an idea should be taken seriously. However, beyond a certain point in experience it then becomes very natural, and very logical to take such an idea with more than a grain of salt.

I’m sure that many people would agree, that art is more than important to the human condition, which is why it’s my own inclination to give credence to the notion that metaphors can be a threat to atoms.

To counter this potential threat, I would offer a solution that’s as crazy and as radical as the original notion but in perfect sync with the notion: Gene Hackman, the retired movie star.

To get to the point in which metaphors are a threat to atoms, and that atoms are frightened of movie, story or poetic symbolism, it feels like a reassuring balance – Hackman has the ability to elevate buzzin’ to the appropriate level, in which it could act as a protector of atoms. To be clear, buzzin’ isn’t synonymous with Hackman, but is just a general type of behaviour, one which isn’t powerful enough on its own to act as a shield against the tyranny of metaphors.

With Hackman though, I honestly feel that the behaviour of buzzin’ could overcome its own limitation, and become a sufficient shield.

I know better than to dismiss reality. I know all too well how the insane and the impossible can gain credibility over time. Metaphors can become the greatest nightmare of reality, and atoms are the creators of reality.

Gene Hackman is no more unique than a John Travolta, or a Harrison Ford or a Neve Campbell or a Jim Carrey; he is however the perfect candidate for this problem. Buzzin’ seems to fit better with Hackman than it does Travolta, or Ford. As to why, I suppose it just comes down to the fact it’s Hackman and neither Ford or Travolta who first come to mind. And this is okay: if the scenario of this article had nothing to do with atoms, and being frightened of metaphors, but if it were to do with whether or not it’s better to not have a dinky or to beat a male movie star in a fight, Harrison Ford would probably be the first of four male actors named to occur – a pattern of inexplicability as the means to creation.

Overall, the issue is a part of life’s internal development, but at the same time the issue is immune to its identity being undermined as a result of this ulterior truth.