Skip to main content

Self-destructive reality, again

Part 1:
    An infinite being died. It floated through nothing. The corpse slowly rotting. Its blood was time. Its flesh was space. Universes bubbled from skin. New life arose inside. The universes had power. Some more than others. The life evolved. The life ventured continents. The life ventured planets. The life ventured stars. The life ventures universes. Then It became selfish. It life sought power. Grand empires were built. Empires spanning the multiverse. Empires controlled by warlords. Their power was godlike. Their greed was insatiable. Their mutual hatred, fiery. One warlord was Ygadle. Ygadle built a machine. The machine could rejuvenate. It was big. It was powerful. It was feared. Ygadle would conquer everything. Other warlords teamed up. A great siege happened. Ygadle fell. The warlords still fought. They wanted the machine. The war waged on. Epoch after epoch passed. Warlord after warlord fell. Finally, only one remained. Glthmir was his name. Glthmir now ruled everything. All reality was his. The people worshiped him. He activated the machine. Everyone was in suspense. The machine rejuvenated. Glthmir gained unimaginable power! The machine kept rejuvenating. The rotted god stirred. The people became panicked. Glthmir sat, horrified. Universes un-bubbled into skin. Time flowed into veins. Reality folded into life. The god revived. The corpse sustained life. The rot catalyzed existence. Without it, all perished. All history was lost. All culture was lost. Everything that had been. It was gone. The god wasn't aware. The god carried on.

Part 2:
    If I were to metagame this question, giving the answer I think my teacher would want instead of my own opinion, I would say that neither is more important. Though, to bare my soul for a second, I honestly prefer shorter sentences. Not four-words short, that was a nightmare, but short enough that I can still understand what's going on. The more add-ons and tangents added to a sentence, the more I forget what's going on or what the subject is. It feels like a bridge, with the periods as supports. If they're too far apart, the whole thing will collapse under its own weight. 
    However, despite personal taste, I recognize that both are required to have sufficiently varied writing. From reading the notes, they seem to be best used to contrast eachother.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Real Killer Whale Was the Friends We Made Along the Way.

     1: Morality is a mostly human-made invention to categorize actions and behaviors of other humans as either desirable (good) or undesirable (bad). Morality is not a binary, obviously there's a lot of grey area, in fact, most of it is grey-area, but my larger point is that ascribing it to stuff that isn't human gets messy. Is a lion "bad" for eating an elk? Is water "good" for hydrating us? Is lightning "a douche" for turning my hotdog into ash? The answer to all of these is, probably, no.      This was a longwinded way of saying that I don't think Tilikum was the villain in this situation. Were they the victim? Broadly speaking, yes. SeaWorld, famously, is a factory for marine-mammal misery, and if the article is anything to go by, Sealand was basically the equivalent of orca hell, “If you pen killer whales in a small steel tank, you are imposing an extreme level of sensory deprivation on them,” .     The villain of this story, in my op...
Post a Comment
Read more

Did I find THE best sources for my topic? Realistically, no.

     Here are the two sources I selected for this discussion:     1:  https://www.space.com/15830-light-speed.html     2:  https://betterexplained.com/articles/understanding-the-monty-hall-problem/      Now, let's go through the CARS for each of them.     The speed of light one doesn't fail the credibility check, but it doesn't exactly pass it, either. The author is not anonymous, and has a background in science, but it's ecology, not physics. The Monty Hall one, I think, fails the credibility check, as I could not find an author.     Both are fairly accurate, the Monty Hall one even having a minigame where you yourself play through the scenario. The light-speed one was posted only one year ago, though the Monty Hall one was posted six years ago (though, I don't think fundamental aspects of statistics tend to change over time).      Both are also reliable, being internally consistent, and spea...
Post a Comment
Read more

Haha wow pandemics seem pretty scary, good thing one of THOSE has never happened.......

     I wouldn't exactly call dystopia a "trending" genre, they've been around for quite awhile. I've read most of hunger games, as well as one and a half books from the maze runner series. Brain scientists seem to attribute the popularity to the developing brain, specifically the rise of emotional complexity/exploration.     Looks to be about some sort of flu that wipes out practically everyone.     My best guess is that the "The bright side of the planet moves towards darkness" line connects to how dystopias are often set in the future? I have no idea what "There is too much world" could mean, it sounds like the person wants  the world to end, but that doesn't really fit with dystopia since that word has a negative connotation. If they want the world to end, and then the world ends, it would be a utopia (for them, at least.)     As I write this, I'm on page 6. My main thought right now is how bad plastic snow would be for your long-ter...
Post a Comment
Read more