home authors guest shorts graphical shorts


The contemporary short-short has its work cut out for it. How does one write something that is at least one of the following: Witty, pithy, thought-provoking, crude, nasty, horny or racist-disguised-as-social-commentary? It's a difficult racket. 500 words or less, an idea or two, and a deadline. Tough going indeed.

There have been successes: This short has humor and a hint of pathos. This short is a delightful tale of envy leading to rapscallion behavior. But this short was clearly written by a cunt.

Now don't get me wrong; cunts can write good shorts. But the singular focus of the Graylink Farthammer series is Graylick's wretched nature. But what examples do we get? None. All we know is that he "was too busy removing the last, deadly flecks of his character from his book to notice she [Alice] had even left." Does that make him devoid of soul as the author suggests? Nay; just a bad husband.

However, the cunt writer in question has done nothing to expand upon the character, or lack thereof, of Buttlick Dambledumper. The writer, who has sullied a fine coach's good name, is Graymail Famblestumper himself, only real. His main character has no character and our author prattles on for something to say, but says nothing, even after 1157 words. Now perhaps I'm missing the point. After all, I am not a writer, per se, but a lover of the printed word. Author, I say give a reason, A REASON, DAMN IT, to love Hartlump Stamplestumper as much as you do.

Date Written: April 22, 2005
Author: Mr. Critic
Average Vote: 1.5

05/3/2005 Will Disney: Okay - let's move on to the funny Guest shorts now!
05/3/2005 Jawbreaker: This author obviously put a lot of time and research into this short. I like it. "But this short was clearly written by a cunt" made me laugh out loud. Not because of the link to the short but because it was just funny. I give it a big HAH.
05/3/2005 TheBuyer (1): No.
05/3/2005 The Rid: Hmm.
05/3/2005 Jawbreaker: No? No what?
05/3/2005 Cyrus (3): Nice rant.
05/3/2005 Cyrus: I appreciate the detailed research that went into this short contrasted against the inability to remember the name of the cunt.
05/3/2005 Turgid: Disney, you might want to rethink Guest Month. Maybe Guest Mondays would work out better? (No offense, author).
05/3/2005 TheBuyer: Detailed research is more than reading three things that everyone here can easily access, this doesn't qualify. Besides, this entire short is a comment on other shorts, please post your comments on shorts not as shorts. Personally, discussion about Rid and Dink makes me want to burn down the internet, but this is guest month and I don't get a say.
05/3/2005 Front (1): This is ugly. It feels like a tacky, self-indulgent message board post. Acme has lost it's lustre.
05/3/2005 The Rid: Hey, if everyone wants to quit discussing me, fine. But keep the t-shirts up long enough for my parents to buy them.
05/3/2005 qualcomm (1): almost entirely devoid of lustre-burnishing properties
05/3/2005 Turgid (1): Better suited for the intranet.
05/3/2005 Mr. Pony: I agree with TheBuyer and Front on this (except the part about Acme losing its lustre--one or two inexplicably shit-covered grapes does not bad grapevine make. The same goes for Guest Month--I feel that given time, great things are possible). I'm a little concerned with why the author thought this would be fun for others to read. (note to self: assign homework: go through queue and re-read own shorts from the perspective of the prospective audience--think about appropriate revisions/restructurings). Jawbreaker, you seem like a good kid; I think you could stand to raise your standards quite a bit.
05/3/2005 The Rid: I feel the same way about this short as I did yesterday's. Not good, not bad, just kind of existing within the vaccuum that it has created for itself.
05/3/2005 Klause Muppet (2): I laughed at "cunts can write good stories", although I know nothing of Mr Joshua. I enjoy the fact "Templeton Dink VS The Rid" is getting more press than it should. But I get the feeling that with my short the day before, we seem to be beating a dead horse.
05/3/2005 Klause Muppet: I second Disney's comment: Bring out the funny!
05/3/2005 Klause Muppet: Litcube! You're all over this shit!
05/3/2005 John Slocum: Pony: should I pile on a low vote here and below (see below short) without a comment, or only if I make a thoughtful comment?
05/3/2005 Litcube (2): Sorry, Claws. I was in Vancouver most of the day listening to retards complain about myriad issues I didn't care about. I did so with a smile on my face. The short: Didn't like it. Much like yesterday (Holy Fucking Shit, by the way, you insidious blackguard), this short has no direction. I agree that it's senseless.
05/3/2005 Litcube: Also, Acme isn't losing it's lustre. At least, I can't see how we can come to that conclusion based on Guest Month's eons-long fucking history. It reminds me of two weeks into the season and the Canucks are 4 and 0, for worse. "Canucks suck," one retard would say, drool cascading off his chin, ropes of mucous sailing into the air with each swivel of his jowls. "Sell the fuckin' tickets. Canucks suck. Fuck em'. Never watching again. Fuck those guys."

Please. Believe.
05/3/2005 Litcube: It's also not losing "its" lustre.
05/3/2005 Front: Revised intent: Acme lost the lustre belonging to it today. or its.
05/3/2005 TheBuyer: ropes of mucous
05/3/2005 Klause Muppet: At least we're all posting and contributing (guests!!!). Lets keep the pending shorts above 10 so we get 2 shorts a day. 1 short a day (without an author short) seems to be lacking.
05/4/2005 Will Disney: Today you will have your wish, Klause!
05/4/2005 Will Disney: also i agree. keep it over 10!
05/4/2005 scoop (1): Get AIDS.