Intermission: The Loser

Yes, loser, I'd say I'm comfortable - caveats at the ready - with that categorisation; obviously there's a broad spectrum of circumstance under which one could classify the condition of being a loser, for which the majority, or a substantial subset thereof, I do not under buckle - fall - easily and, of those which I do, I do not so do in general by de facto or default - can't - in the sense of someone totally incapable, paralysed by a certain absence, or lacking - be it of a mental or physical capacity - in the so-called application of natural aptitude, or for lack or wont of educational opportunity, or blight of gestation within a hostile environment or caste, class and creed, or, if one were so superstitious, by being cursed through circumstance of birth below an infelicitous alignment of constellations; indeed, I do not even necessarily fall below the banner of loser with equal measure to my fellow, fulfil all of the loosely associated set of criteria or descriptions said to define this particular example and/or that particular example of loser, rather, instead, I chose to actively identity myself with - though not in the existential sense of choice as the complete, comprehensive sum and total characterisation of my existence - as a someone who won't; not for the lack of trying in the face of, or exception by mere refusal to participate in the collective path trod by the Nietzschean herd, or even that narrower furrow ploughed by certain exclusive groups or elites propagated either by their own action or decree through their various organs of mass communication, or those more inner, select, closed groupings, limited either by strict circulation or mere accessibility to those adept at a professional or peer-reviewed idiom - but by resistance in a refusal to endorse, implicitly or explicitly, by participation or abstinence, in absence or presence, the role of loser-dressed-as-winner, when I am willing to win on my own as the loser.