Shop More Submit  Join Login
×



Details

Submitted on
September 19, 2012
File Size
1.4 KB
Submitted with
Sta.sh
Link
Thumb

Stats

Views
134
Favourites
5 (who?)
Comments
6

License

Creative Commons License
Some rights reserved. This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.
×
"Well, now that sex and sexuality are personal choice (in theory), food has become the new moral obsession."

—Q.

"Of course. Haven't you heard the new litany? How much are you eating? You, personally. Of fats. And then also, carbs. Generally are you eating healthy. Are you eating too much. Or are you not eating enough? Are you binging. Bulimic, anorexic. Under or over weight. How's your waist looking? And then, how's your waste looking? Have you any idea the state of your colon. Any at all. When did you last get down and have a really good look, faced your faeces and properly, thoroughly checked for fibre, hard lumps, grease, blood. When was your last detox, if ever. When. When? Be honest."

—Q.

"No, that's just the beginning, that's just for starters—the entrée! The contents of your own stomach are no longer personal. No longer private. What's really in there, what secrets are you hiding away in your belly? Are you eating organic? Are you eating sustainable, local source. Are you eating fair trade. Are you eating the stone-age diet. Pesco-vegatarian? Proper vegetarian? Or have you done the right thing, have you gone full vegan. Have you gone raw food yet. And if not, why not. Above all though, the cardinal rule—it's what goes into a person, not what comes out, that defiles them. Defines them."
It's true
Add a Comment:
 
:iconfalijn:
First of all: I like your choice of subject! A very thoughtful and insightful approach to an increasingly more important subject.

The form of your writing follows the content. You are able to capture the absurdity both in what you write and how you write it. The questions, the embarrassing details, the guilt the person who asks the questions tries to call upon, the complete seriousness of the speaker, the urgency and utter belief in his/her righteousness... It is all strengthened by your way of presenting us this subject. There are mainly questions, some assumptions presented as 'the truth', there is an organic flow between the questions that echo the not very linearity of natural language. By throwing all these questions at us in a paratactic list, with each question being equally 'very important' and 'very urgent', you confront us with its absurdity. This is further enhanced by the repetition of certain words, like 'and then'. This adds to the casual and natural feel of the language and the feeling of urgency.

Most of all, I really like how you only present us with the 'believer' and his/her questions. You are critiquing by showing us what is (though -I hope- taken to a whole new absurd level), never by stating what you believe. Thus, as a reader, I am left with absurd questions and am encouraged and allowed to find my own answers. This is very powerful!

Therefore, my only remark would be to cut the opening statement. Your piece doesn't need it for one. Moreover, by plunging us full frontal in this absurd situation you create a greater juxtaposition between are own normal life and the situation described in the text. Furthermore, it gives the reader even more freedom in forming their own opinion, increasing the power of your critique. Equally, I am not entirely convinced that the sentences from 'the contents of your own stomach... to hiding away in your belly?' are necessary or even of actual value in the flow of the text. Cutting them could perhaps make the text yet a little more sharper, pointed. The same may apply to the ',not what comes out,' in the second to last sentence. It does not some necessary to argue the point in the sentence. Besides, by removing that, the contradiction between the viewpoints presented in the first and second paragraph becomes even more intriguing. You create a 'Wait, what?'-effect, making the reader jump back and forth between the paragraphs and thus making the speaker appear even more erratic.

In conclusion, I give you full marks, apart from technique (almost full marks there), as I believe the impact of the text could be enhanced a little more by way of technique and form.

Thank you for this piece!
What do you think?
The Artist thought this was FAIR
1 out of 1 deviants thought this was fair.

The Artist has requested Critique on this Artwork

Please sign up or login to post a critique.

:icongrowinluvhandles:
growinluvhandles Featured By Owner Dec 4, 2012  Student Writer
How can you pack so much thought and reflection into so few words!

I envy your writing skills.
Reply
:iconpseudometry:
pseudometry Featured By Owner Dec 4, 2012   Writer
Why thank you!
Reply
:iconlancelotprice:
LancelotPrice Featured By Owner Sep 19, 2012
I detest cleansing green juices; I am defined by Bourbon and Coca-Cola, hamburgers and fruit pies, fried potatos and chickens, and bacon. Lest I forget, green salty acid olives. And tea and chocolate. I shall die happier than they who protest too much.
Reply
:iconpseudometry:
pseudometry Featured By Owner Sep 20, 2012   Writer
Reminds me of that Woody Allen quote: "You can live to be a hundred if you give up all the things that make you want to live to be a hundred" -- or thereabouts, anyway.
Reply
:iconlancelotprice:
LancelotPrice Featured By Owner Sep 20, 2012
:D
Reply
:iconpseudometry:
pseudometry Featured By Owner Sep 21, 2012   Writer
;)
Reply
Add a Comment: