home authors guest shorts graphical shorts
Tiger Yitzakh (named after his uncle, Tiger Sedgwick - his mother’s brother), a cunt to a man, rolled a first class bone on the coffee table, lit it up and toked that shit. He shot himself a glance in the mirror to the right of the plushly upholstered sofa upon which he sat and thought to himself, “Am I really that guy with the mutton chops sitting on that plushly upholstered sofa smoking this fat J?” He turned to a different mirror – he had many mirrors because he often doubted the existence of his mutton chops – and answered himself out loud: “Yup, you betcha.”
Coincidentally, the phrase “Yup, you betcha,” uttered with precisely the same inflection, pitch, timbre, tempo and rhythm Tiger had just employed, which was a particular constellation of linguistic attributes previously unmatched in the history of speech and unlikely to be struck again for eternity, is a Froostarian idiom for “I put my best mud a little to the left of and slightly above the mouth of your mother-daughter.” [Interestingly, the Froostarian word that translates as “mother-daughter” actually means “mother” and linguists had been confounded by this for centuries until one bright linguist one bright morning had the bright idea of explaining to the Froostarians that it was ridiculous to put two words together and have it mean only one of the two words. The Froostarians ignored him, of course, since he was a dumb cunt, and continued on the same way; but linguists the world over stopped giving a shit and concentrated instead on languages that include tongue clicks.]
Also coincidentally, at the precise moment Tiger uttered his fateful, “Yup, you betcha,” a Froostarian female walked past and heard him through the open window. That a Froostarian was in Pittsburgh and passing by Tiger's window at that precise moment could understandably be viewed with a certain disbelief, but nevertheless that's what happened. Lucky for him the idea of putting one's best mud on the cheek of a mother-daughter is attractive to a Froostarian female and, gripped by a sudden lust, she leaped through the window and had her way with him. They fell in love and married and eventually the Froostarian (whose name, coincidentally translates as “Tiger Sedgwick") shaved Tiger’s mutton chops in his sleep one night and, since there was now more definition to the existence (or lack thereof) of Tiger's mutton chops, they were able to diminish the number of mirrors in the house.
Date Written: July 23, 2004Comments:
Author: John Slocum
Average Vote: 3.5
07/28/2004 qualcomm (3): sloppy writing. "a cunt to a man" in the first sentence seems to refer to one person. "which was a particular constellation..." is an awkward and stupid clause, and comes at the wrong place in the sentence to boot. the writing in general tries to be "fancy" and fails miserably. the short also drags on a bit. the randomness of the froosterian twist is nice, and an idea that could come off as overly silly and cutesy is presented in such a way that it does not. but damn, that writing.
07/28/2004 Ewan Snow: OSS, what do you mean by "seems to refer to one man". It refers to Tiger Yitzakh, right? So what? I thought the fanciness was intentionally stuffy and silly, so I wasn't bothered by it. I also liked the randomness of the Frostian bit, but thought it was overplayed a tad. In general, this short didn't live up to its potential, the last graf wasn't very funny, and I didn't laugh at any point. However, I don't really see the flaws OSS points out (or see them but think they were intended) and hence a gentleman's four.
07/28/2004 Ewan Snow: Oh, shit, I misread it as "a cunt OF a man", not "a cunt TO a man". Yes, OSS, it makes no sense. I'm glad I didn't vote yet. I may have to revise down...
07/28/2004 anonymous: Jeeez, it's just an expression. "a cunt to a man" means he's a cunt (a cunt to anyone he meets, ie. a cunt to all men). I can hear the expression coming out of both your mouths, I can't believe neither of you have ever heard it (not the 'cunt' part, just the '..to a man' part. Shame on both of you. Ewan's right with 'the fanciness was intentionally stuffy and silly.' Trying to make fun of long, clumsy sentences in academic writing. Shove it in your ass, OSS.
07/28/2004 anonymous: I don't mind this one. 'Cunt to a man' is indeed an expression.
07/28/2004 anonymous: An expresion that has been misused in this case
07/28/2004 scoop: If everyone plays their cards right we could have the next controversy here. Game faces all around!
07/28/2004 qualcomm: author: cunt to a man is an expression, but it means not what you think it means. it is supposed to be applied to multiple people, ie, tom, dick and harry, a cunt to a man. each one is a cunt, in other words. i naturally thought you knew this, and were mistakenly applying it to tiger and his uncle. either way, you'd be mistaken. i'm sorry. as for the stuffy writing being intentional, i realize this, but i really don't think you were trying to write ineptly and stuffily. am i wrong?
07/28/2004 Ewan Snow: Author, the expression "to a man" is usually used to describe a group of people, and specifies that all members of the group share the specified characteristic. For instance "the clowns were cunts to a man" means that every single clown was a cunt. Now don’t you feel silly? You should. Please apologize for your foolish bewilderment that your usage was not clear to us.
07/28/2004 Ewan Snow: Yes, yes.
07/28/2004 Ewan Snow: But OSS, other than the misuse of "to a man", I didn't find the writing inept, just foolishly stiff and formal, which I assumed was a joke. What else was inept?
07/28/2004 John Slocum: I'll defer to your wisdom to a man, I'm sure you're both right.
07/28/2004 John Slocum: oopsy!
07/28/2004 anonymous: So besides the two things you pointed out, OSS (about which you're wrong, what else is 'inept?'
07/28/2004 anonymous: ), what else is 'inept?'
07/28/2004 anonymous: Ewan: many clowns are cunts to a man, one clown is a cunt to a man.
07/28/2004 qualcomm: ewan, as i indicated in my first comment, the clause in the second graf starting with "which was a particular constellation..." is misplaced in the sentence.
07/28/2004 qualcomm: author: i thought the tone was all over the place. if in fact you were attempting to be stiff and formal (you actually said below that you were mocking "academic writing), how do you justify the first sentence's highly vernacular final clause? and then, the last paragraph goes into a looser tone as well. i'm not a stickler for uniformity of style throughout a short, but there should be some reason for, or defensible effect arising from, modulations.
07/28/2004 Ewan Snow: Oh, yeah, forgot. I'm not sure if that's at the wrong place or not, because it's unclear if "which was a particular constellation..." is supposed to be modifying "the phrase “Yup, you betcha,”" or if it's modifying "the same inflection, pitch, timbre, tempo and rhythm Tiger had just employed". Anyway, it's not clear. OSS, please educate usus by re-writing the sentence more clearly. I'll do the same right now. C'mon, it'll be gay!
07/28/2004 qualcomm: OK! hard to read, but correct:
Coincidentally, the phrase “Yup, you betcha,” uttered with precisely the same inflection, pitch, timbre, tempo and rhythm (a particular constellation of linguistic attributes previously unmatched in the history of speech and unlikely to be struck again for eternity) Tiger had just employed, is a Froostarian idiom for “I put my best mud a little to the left of and slightly above the mouth of your mother-daughter.”
07/28/2004 anonymous: We've already established you're wrong about that. Are there other examples, which don't really exist, but about which I'll humor you for the sake of conversation (and for which you will be grateful), you could come up with for the sake of showing the sloppiness of the writing in this short?
07/28/2004 Mr. Pony: I thought it mean that every man got to have a cunt.
07/28/2004 anonymous: yes, I was going to say maybe it should have been parenthetical
07/28/2004 qualcomm: what have we established i'm wrong about, author?
07/28/2004 qualcomm: author, in response to your comment timed at 7/28/2004 10:36:44 AM, please see mine timed at 7/28/2004 10:33:12 AM. i think the tone/style is all over the place in this short, even within single sentences. the effect is unpleasant, and doesn't come off like someone playing with style conventions. it comes off as inept. this is my unassailable opinion.
07/28/2004 anonymous: OSS: I can't justify it. I started off with a totally different idea for the short, got the 1st 'tence, then changed the idea for the short. However, I liked the shift, and returning to the other tone at the end.
07/28/2004 qualcomm: author, i don't mean to be condescending, or a nabokovian martinet of style. but we're here to pore over craft, sir.
07/28/2004 Ewan Snow: I missed the last several comments, but this is in response to OSS several posts ago: OSS, I think the style was going for the time honored acme joke of high falutin language mixed with random coarse vernaculars. Not that that gag is at its best here, but I don't think it was unintentional.
07/28/2004 qualcomm: snow, i agree. my problem with this example of that gag is that the writing has to be either a) spot-on clean and shiny; or b) obviously, intentionally bad. i don't think this short nailed either of these mouth-feels.
07/28/2004 anonymous: I'm getting a wee bit confused with the timing of posts as I keep getting interrupted with work related items. Happy to pore over craft, didn't think you were being condescending.
07/28/2004 Ewan Snow: You jerk, I WAS SO being condescending. How else am I supposed to speak to somebody SO FAR BELOW ME?????
07/28/2004 anonymous: You can't fool me, Snow, you cuddly, nice guy. You don't have a condescending bone in your body. And I was responding to OSS.
07/28/2004 qualcomm: i'unno. but snow, please, let's stick to craft
07/28/2004 Ewan Snow: Incidentally, author, I would like to confirm for tomorrow night at 7:30. Is that cool? OSS, are you still prepared to mind the tot?
07/28/2004 qualcomm: is that about craft, snow? please remand such posts to the message board.
07/28/2004 John Slocum: I agree the style is everywhere. This all started when I got in a cab last week and noticed the driver's name was Tiger Yitzak. "What a great name for a short character," I thought. I also had it in mind to do an OSS parody, hence the first sentence (which you may or may not agree is sausagian). Then I lost interest in doing the parody and had douglas adams in mind. Then I came and shat at the same time. Snow: consider it booked unless you hear from me.
07/28/2004 Will Disney (4):
07/28/2004 Ewan Snow: ...more like Kraft.
07/28/2004 anonymous: I meant to add before...what's wrong with styles ranging all over the place, besides the unpleasantness constellated by OSS?
07/28/2004 Benny Maniacs (3): I agree with everyone, but if some people are offended by this, I agree more with them. I bet everyone thought I wrote this shit!
07/28/2004 Dylan Danko: OSS is right about the phrase 'cunt to a man.' He is also anon_b.
07/28/2004 Jon Matza (4): Clowns are NOT cunts, author! 3.67 stars. Last graf held no thrills but I got a laugh out of the tartly sarcastic "...particular constellation of linguistic attributes...eternity".
07/28/2004 Dylan Danko: I am not The Finch. That was someone else.
07/28/2004 anonymous: anon_b is not OSS. anon_b is much better looking
07/28/2004 The Finch: Then Danko; someone knows your password.
07/28/2004 qualcomm: wasn't me, danko
07/28/2004 anonymous: Password is: bacon
07/28/2004 anonymous: Sorry, you're right Matza. I meant, clowns have cunts: clown-cunts.
07/28/2004 Ewan Snow: I just tried to log in as dylan with the password bacon and it didn't work. YOU LIAR!
07/28/2004 anonymous: OSS IS NOT RIGHT ABOUT SAID PHRASE. DANKO, YOU'RE A CUNT TO A MAN!
07/28/2004 anonymous: HI! My name is Obama! I'm the new boy wonder!
07/28/2004 anonymous: Careful, Maniacs, or I'll tea-bag your appetizer.
07/28/2004 Dylan Danko: Author, please don't be mad. That wasn't me. I would never sass my leader.
07/28/2004 anonymous: So you agree with me about the expression, right?
07/28/2004 TheBuyer: Danko don't do it!
07/28/2004 qualcomm: following ewan's message board suggestion: the last 15 or so comments detract lustre. everyone who's trying to be funny, stop.
07/28/2004 Dylan Danko: No, OSS is right and is now my new leader. Also I would like to point out a recent The Lerpa sighting.
07/28/2004 anonymous: nice work, buzzkiller
07/28/2004 Dylan Danko: what i do?
07/28/2004 Ferucio P. Chhretan: The Lerpa lives in Maryland now? I'm glad to know that he gets along with cats and dogs.
07/29/2004 scoop: I hereby swear a solemn oath to vote on every short that is published, including this one, as soon as I can figure out what to give it, from here on out!
07/30/2004 scoop (3): I admire the strangeness of the material here and want to reward it. However there is something flat in the style that detracts from the wierdness instead of underscoring it. So here is what I think is referred to as a gentleman's three.
08/3/2004 toobs (4): Good Fine and Dandy..