Posted 2005-03-26 04:46:27 by
This essay describes Richard XXXXXXXX's opinions of the koala species. While I think Dr. XXXXXXXX has some interesting ideas, it is difficult to take him seriously as his writing evinces several technical flaws. I hope he does not mind that I have taken the liberty of rewriting his essay; I have tried my best to preserve the spirit of the original work whilst improving the quality of the writing:
In this essay, the author will show that while koalas are “endangered,” nothing should be done about this, as he doesn't care; even if all koalas were to die, their deaths would have little or no effect on the author's life. He is well informed on the subject, and does not intend to think on it any further, as it would be a waste of time. Koalas lack intellect and have never offered their assistance to the author, which leads to the obvious question: why should the author assist koalas in their endeavors? If the koalas were all to die, it would free up habitat space for animals, e.g. panthers and similar, which Charles Darwin, in his commonly-accepted theory of evolution, classified as “fit” -- a quality hereafter denoted with the adjective “hard.” Koalas are weak, as evidenced by the experiment, first proposed by Dr. Herta Oberhauser, of a hole placed in the ground: the most common outcome is that the entire koala family becomes trapped inside and slowly dies, which is why the author does not like them.
Granted, koalas have sharp claws, but they lack the physical strength to make proper use of them. As a rule, koalas are small and fat and are often found climbing trees. This author has painstakingly developed, with admitted pleasure, a scenario in which a tropical storm visits a family of koalas whilst they are clinging to a tree and to their delusions of being “hard.” In this, which the author has dubbed the “Helvetica Scenario,” the koalas all fall off of their beloved tree in response to the storm's fierce winds. They would most likely break their necks and misplace their claws along the way, and they would also be very sad.
It is worth reiterating that koalas are not “hard.” For instance, they will rapidly locate and ascend the nearest tree when confronted by the mere sight of a deer situated 15.24 meters or less from their location. Koalas lack the intelligence of superior animals. They could almost certainly improve their cognitive abilities if they were only to relocate their brains to the pouches currently occupied by their offspring, but due to their lack of intelligence, they are unlikely to conceive of this obvious optimization. Koalas spend their ample free time attempting to insinuate themselves into the branch of the animal kingdom represented by the kangaroo, but thankfully, their weakness has so far prevented success. Even the people who consent to a koala's incompetent attempted application of the Socratic Method of persuasion quickly realize that kangaroos have large and powerful legs, whereas the legs of a koala are small and weak. The infamous koala tail is also small and weak, in contrast to a kangaroo's tail, which could inflict fatal injury on a koala with negligible difficulty were it to set its mind to the task.
To add insult to injury, a koala's anus lacks the length necessary to breathe underwater. This disability leads them to drown as soon as their feet touch water, which often comes as a surprise to anyone who has not studied the koala's ill-formed rectum in depth. While a koala is attempting to drink water, making sure to keep its feet dry and safe, a North American black bear visiting Australia on a package tour might sneak up behind it and lift it off of the ground. The koala wouldn't know how to protect itself, because it has no experience with being protected, and thus the defenseless koala would have no recourse when lifted by a bear. Upon reading an early draft of this essay, several people have suggested that the koala could scratch the bear, but this would no doubt escalate into fisticuffs, at the koala's eventual expense.
It is vitally important to realize that one should not care about koalas and should, in fact, allow them to perish at the hands (or claws, natch) of other Australian animals and also North American black bears. Koalas are unimportant, as evidenced by nature's palpable disdain for them as a species. Koalas do not belong in this world, and as there is already a severe shortage of common living space, we should free all koalas from captivity. That's what they're there for.
To summarize, koalas do nothing except sit in trees, waiting for their collective death. Koalas have a long track record of refusing to help anyone, and if they were to die, they would rapidly join the ranks of all kangaroo-related species that have ceased to exist. In this essay, the author has shown why koalas are unimportant because they are dumb.
| Posted by AdamMil on 2005-03-30 23:42:22 |
I liked your original version better. :-)
| Posted by Jim Crawford
on 2005-03-30 23:55:48 |
Hm, what did you like specifically? I thought this draft made several significant improvements :)
| Posted by AdamMil on 2005-03-31 00:05:45 |
I'm not sure because I don't remember the exact wording of the last one. But the phrasing struck me as being funnier.
This one seems almost too sophisticated for its own good. The added complexity seems to obscure some of the humor!
| Posted by Jim Crawford
on 2005-03-31 02:51:03 |
I thought the humor came from the pretentiousness of the writing :)
Though maybe it's suffering from the wordiness that caused Adam Cadre to spurn the Bulwer-Lytton contest.