Dear Sir who accosted me on Thursday evening of the previous week,
I regret that our brief entanglement at the corner of Gilman and Wisconsin St. left us little time to correspond, but your verbal and physical assaults upon my person outweighed my natural curiosity, causing me to take leave of the conversation rather abruptly. My hastily beaten retreat left me with several unanswered questions, which I would now like to address to you:
First, I must express my ignorance as to your motive. If your intention was to mug me, then why did you not simply say so? I am not so miserly that I would risk my life over my petty cash, and were I to be threatened with a weapon, I would've bequeathed my billfold to you with the utmost alacrity! While on the subject, would it not be better to rob someone before they spent the sum of their wages at the local tavern (unless you desired to take the receipt for my bar tab into your possession)?
If you simply intended to harm me, why did you disclose your presence by running at me from 10 yards away? State law makes no mention of Fair Warning"" with regard to random street beatings but if you are still feeling so magnanimous, in the future I would appreciate a less ambiguous warning, perhaps something like ""En Garde!""
As it was, I first misjudged your intent and simply moved aside to grant you free passage down the sidewalk. Such is the behaviour of a gentleman, Sir, and I must say that your decision to buffet me about the head with your fists reflects poorly on your character. I can understand that such social graces are easily forgotten in the heat of the moment (how I responded less than cordially!), but the way in which you carried out your attack suggests you were hardly thinking at all.
Having been attacked by strangers on previous occasions, I can say with authority that your technique leaves much to be desired. Why just two years ago, a passerby managed to cause injury to several of my friends by first talking his way into our confidences with friendly banter. The fellow then went on to send three people to the hospital for stitches and bite one's ear halfway off, despite the fact he had apparently been imbibing questionable tonics before carrying out his assault.
That, certainly, was a motivated young man.
You, on the other hand, squandered the element of surprise. As I stood confused and flat-footed in the street, your high velocity and considerably greater mass surely gave you more than enough momentum to fell me in the street. Yet when I covered my head with my arms and proceeded to scream ""Ahhhh!"" you just swatted at me and attempted to wrestle me to the ground.
Furthermore, you followed your initial charge with a series of obscene and strange accusations which I will lower myself by repeating. What exactly did you mean when you accused me of being a ""[rather] cocky little [vagabond]?"" I would describe my reaction to your battering me around the head as a combination of ""surprise"" and ""fright"" - a far cry from overweening self-confidence. And when I refrained from answering your questions in favor of running away in haste, you attempted to wound my pride with coarse language, having failed to injure my person.
Your unfounded claims about my sexual orientation exposed not only your own deplorable prejudices but also a serious lapse of reason. One cannot begin an altercation with attempted physical assault and then withdraw to childish name-calling.
Ultimately, your poorly planned harassment was not only ineffectual, it was offensive in its slapdash (dare I say ""bush league""?) execution. I consider it a personal affront to be treated so lightly, Sir, and insist that if I am worth attacking, then I am worth attacking properly.
Yours,
Matthew S. Hunziker
Should you like to exchange grammatical jabs, linguistic hooks or writerly headlocks with a man of letters, contact Matthew at hunziker@wisc.edu.
