Tuesday, March 25, 2014


Throughout my writing, I've discovered that I have a proclivity for the vertical curves that set clauses apart. You know, parentheses. They enable clarification but may also create convolution. They allow for emphasis of details but can also radiate sarcasm. Whether you view these as shortcomings or not, parentheses are hands down (or up) the best punctuation. Here is my ode to them. (Disclaimer: I may have bent some parenthetical rules for this piece. Trust me, I know.)

            One (this signifies a sole entity, though in reality, nothing is separate; our very atoms are tied to other atoms, both in this universe and parallel universes) day (based on a post-equinox solar cycle in the Northern Hemisphere that obeys both Mountain Standard and Daylight Savings Times) a pig (in reality it was a sow (even more specifically, a female member of Sus scrofa that had just entered the third year (based on Earth’s revolution around the Sun, as calculated by imperfect members of the aforementioned planet) of its life)) awoke (this statement lets one assume that it had been asleep, though only the pig knows (to make another assumption, that pigs are sentient and conscious of their actions) if it had been sleeping or merely resting its eyelids).  It (I apologize, for this should be “she”; humans have a poor habit of grouping certain animals with objects, which receive the androgynous pronoun “it,” yet the earlier detail that said pig was female should dictate future pronoun use) was (let us adhere to a linear notion of time, where there is a past, present, and future; however, this is false, as everyone knows that space-time is not straight, and can maintain multiple properties at one instance, as dictated by string theory (nevertheless, the pig (which is a simpler creature, and potentially not even sentient) probably thought (if at all) of the past as a series of previous, unalterable events)) happy (again, this adjective presupposes that the pig has consciousness, and beyond that, emotions, but even if the pig (sow (Sus scrofa)) could feel, there may be multiple connotations of happiness.  (Biologically it is a build up of dopamine neurotransmitters, though this definition will not satisfy the normal human, because it denies the notions of personality, spirit, and consciousness.  Still, happiness is relative and classified by the person to whom the emotion is referring.  Many people claim happiness merely to maintain an outward level of aplomb (perhaps this is what the pig was doing (though that is unlikely)).  Some say they are happy so that they can pretend that they are.  Others are truly happy and can comfortably say they are satisfied with their lives.  Happiness can come from simple things (like being alive (a likely source of happiness for a pig)), grandiose ideas (like success), or shallow concepts (like money (a worry a pig would not (and could not) have)).  Happiness (whatever it is), everyone (to make a generalization) can agree, is something for which to strive.)).

No comments:

Post a Comment