Showdown II: "The Final Flicker" -- Results
0 views
Skip to first unread message
Punky Girl
Mar 2, 2009, 1:35:17 AM3/2/09
to storiesonline
Story A was written by SerenaJ.
Story B was written by Jekke.
28 February 2009 - Showdown #2 "The Final Flicker"
Story B was written by Jekke.
28 February 2009 - Showdown #2 "The Final Flicker"
SerenaJ vs Jekke (aka Vulgar Argot)
Rules: 3 hours/2000 words minimum
Moderator: PunkyGirl (aka Shannon)
Judges: Rache, The Black Knight, MassiveReader
Final Score: 2-1 in favor of Jekke
Contest Trivia: Because Shannon got stuck at a party, she broke her promise to the SOL.net group to post both stories right after receiving them!
Congratulations Jekke! I hope both you and SerenaJ had fun... without further ado, here are the judges' comments/rationale for their votes.
Rache's Comments/Rationale
**********************************
(Note: Rache has also posted more extensive thoughts on these two stories in the comments/stories post thread under her name "Avid Reader")
I liked story "A" better, the one about the college girl and her professor. I liked them both actually and I think "B" was actually written better and I liked the basic plot/theme more, but the A had a stronger ending and generated more empathy with me and so I liked "A" and I vote for that one.
The Black Knight's Comments/Rationale
***********************************************
Well, story B gets my vote.
Technically, it was the superior story. That's the first thing I noticed. The vampire story aspect - while welcome enough... I like vampire stories - was a little too obviously foreshadowed, so it did lose some for that; the unconventional ending won it points for originality, even as it lost some of its appeal.
Still, I found story B appealed to me more. I did find it interesting that both writers chose a theme of futility, but story B managed to pull it off without making it the entirety of the piece.
MassiveReader's Comments/Rationale
*********************************************
Both stories were enjoyable and ably written. Story "B" had a couple of obvious typos, some gramatical errors, two likely errors in word use, and a few run on sentences early on (that might actually have been used intentionally, as an affect to establish a particular mood). Most of this would have been caught with a bit more proof reading or editing. I rather suspect the author simply ran out the clock. Story "A" was proofed more effectively and tightly written.
In my opinion, due to plot originality, depth of character development and general appeal Story "B" was far and away the superior of the two.
I pick the second story, story "B" as the clear winner.
*****
Story "A" - 2,488 words - A quasi-romantic interlude drawing on the metaphorical device of candlelight representing love, and the flickering out of love at the end of an affair - which also serves as a framing techinque to present the history of the affair. Enough story is provided to to make the characters interesting. There were no obvious or distracting technical flaws. We are told a lot about the situations and decisions of Janet as the author relates the inevitable progression of the affair with Jake. But that is actually a criticism, for as the story unfolds we get told about them and her feelings rather than discovering their emotions and personalities through either the action or dialogue. My other criticism is that we've heard this story many, many times before: a bright innocent student used for nefarious purposes by the cad of a professor. It's a whole genre these days that the author actually refers to near the end as "Smart women, foolish choices". I understand this was meant to be a "slice of life" representation, explaining the denoument of an affair, but I kept waiting for something new to be presented, or something to happen that would draw me in; some reason to engage with the protaganist.
The sense of melancholy and inevitability the author was able to successfully portray wasn't enough to bring me to the point where I invested to any great extent in the main character, Janet, and that is the central flaw in this story. All the expected parts were there, assembled with a deft hand in workmanlike fashion, but I got no real sense of their being living, feeling people behind the masks presented. The predatory teacher, especially, was poorly drawn - assembled almost entirely out of stock materials. In fact, both characters were stereotypes to a great extent. The real originality displayed here was in the denoument, which was foreshadowed to be the end of the affair, but ended up as a continuation of the woman's addiction to a lying sexual predator for the thrills he provides; because in her insecurity she feel that this is her only chance at even erzatz happiness. There was no change or development in Janet as a character because of her experiences with Jake, she ended up as nothing more than a convienience to be used.
***
Story "B" - 3,140 words - As I have already said, there a dozen or so easily corrected problems with this story from a technical standpoint. Those aside, I felt this story truly incorporated the title throughout. The pacing was exemplary, starting out glacially then rising and falling up to the pentultimate climax (and the climax was a sexual climax; this being erotica I thought that was apropos), with an epilogue that made the story stronger. In a few short paragraphs, the author entirely reversed the theme of the story from waiting and a long slow deterioration towards death to one of rebirth and life.
The use of John, the main character, as the storyteller was effective and helped me as a the reader identify with the protaganist. The dramatic visualization was adept, using sounds, smells, visuals and lighting to set the tone. Making the projector itself (Vitalux - Latin for "light of life") a full character in the story, almost more-so than the mysterious woman, instead of a simple metaphor was a wonderful idea and handled with skill.
The vampire plot element nearly threw me out of the story as the foreshadowing for that was stuffed in fairly close to the reveal, but the author brought me back by avoiding the cliché that Dana feeding on the protaganist, or even worse, converting him to one of the undead would have been.
I'm not quite sure whether the inheritance of the theater added or detracted from the story, it seems a little too happily ever after.
We are not directly told a lot about Dana, the female character - outside of physical descriptions - until late in the story. That helps maintain her air of mystery. Yet the author succesfully leaves us with a real sense of both the narrarator, John, and the woman Dana, as actual people.
The title and cinematic theme was integrated into the story in divers ways; the setting, alternating scenes of dark and light, the over-all film noir tone, as a plot device, and through the backstory of lives on hold, waiting, and either flickering out or flaring again to new life.
I have two minor quibbles, both easily fixed. The first is the use of a not-a-word-in-english "pharmacia" which I suppose was meant to be pharmacopeia. The second is the use of "Cellulose" to refer to film when what was probably meant was "Celluloid". I'm surprised the author missed these.
All in all, quite an enganging and satisfying read.
****
What folows is a digression and concerns just a single word out of the entire story. In my defense, it did take me out of things for a minute or two.
The author misused the word "Cellulose": an organic polysaccharide that, together with Lignin, forms the bulk of wood and most plant fibers. What the author likely meant was "Celluloid": a thermoplastic polymer of Nitrocellulose and Camphor used for film stock by the Kodak Corporation under the trade name "Nitrate" film prior to the development of acetate based "Safety Stock" film circa 1951.
This seems like a minor point, but it is the very reason for the profession of projectionist - which was a position requiring a good bit of safety training in addition to diverse mechanical skills, to constantly monitor the projector while films were being shown. Celluloid was, in fact, plasticized guncotton and extremely flamable. An ignited canister of Celluloid film will actually burn underwater. In fact, powdered film stock made from discarded prints was the most common explosive for special effects use in the film industry as late as the 1970's. Nitrate film deteriorates to either powder or goo, depending on the storage conditions, as the nitric acid released from the film stock eventually breaks down the polymer. It is still highly flamable in both these forms.
Thus the genesis of the commonly misquoted 1919 argument of Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. (in the seminal free speech case of Shrenk vs. United States) suggesting "falsely yelling fire in a crowded theater" as not being protected speech. Theater fires were actually a fairly common occurance about that time in history due to the dangers inherent in the highly combustible film stock in near proximity to primitive high intensity light sources operating at high temperatures, which eventually led to the legal requirement of fireproof projection rooms and the separate profession of projectionist.
It also explains the frequency of fires that occurred at several motion picture studios; fires that have destroyed so many of the early movies.
End of digression.
****
Please excuse my disjointed ramblings as I composed these comments in snatches during a day long visit by my relatives. And forgive any errors in perception or misused literary terms, I have no background in the area of literary analysis to base my comments on; only a lot of reading.
Congratulations to both writers on their fine efforts.
John
~massivereader is all talked out now~
**********************************
(Note: Rache has also posted more extensive thoughts on these two stories in the comments/stories post thread under her name "Avid Reader")
I liked story "A" better, the one about the college girl and her professor. I liked them both actually and I think "B" was actually written better and I liked the basic plot/theme more, but the A had a stronger ending and generated more empathy with me and so I liked "A" and I vote for that one.
The Black Knight's Comments/Rationale
***********************************************
Well, story B gets my vote.
Technically, it was the superior story. That's the first thing I noticed. The vampire story aspect - while welcome enough... I like vampire stories - was a little too obviously foreshadowed, so it did lose some for that; the unconventional ending won it points for originality, even as it lost some of its appeal.
Still, I found story B appealed to me more. I did find it interesting that both writers chose a theme of futility, but story B managed to pull it off without making it the entirety of the piece.
MassiveReader's Comments/Rationale
*********************************************
Both stories were enjoyable and ably written. Story "B" had a couple of obvious typos, some gramatical errors, two likely errors in word use, and a few run on sentences early on (that might actually have been used intentionally, as an affect to establish a particular mood). Most of this would have been caught with a bit more proof reading or editing. I rather suspect the author simply ran out the clock. Story "A" was proofed more effectively and tightly written.
In my opinion, due to plot originality, depth of character development and general appeal Story "B" was far and away the superior of the two.
I pick the second story, story "B" as the clear winner.
*****
Story "A" - 2,488 words - A quasi-romantic interlude drawing on the metaphorical device of candlelight representing love, and the flickering out of love at the end of an affair - which also serves as a framing techinque to present the history of the affair. Enough story is provided to to make the characters interesting. There were no obvious or distracting technical flaws. We are told a lot about the situations and decisions of Janet as the author relates the inevitable progression of the affair with Jake. But that is actually a criticism, for as the story unfolds we get told about them and her feelings rather than discovering their emotions and personalities through either the action or dialogue. My other criticism is that we've heard this story many, many times before: a bright innocent student used for nefarious purposes by the cad of a professor. It's a whole genre these days that the author actually refers to near the end as "Smart women, foolish choices". I understand this was meant to be a "slice of life" representation, explaining the denoument of an affair, but I kept waiting for something new to be presented, or something to happen that would draw me in; some reason to engage with the protaganist.
The sense of melancholy and inevitability the author was able to successfully portray wasn't enough to bring me to the point where I invested to any great extent in the main character, Janet, and that is the central flaw in this story. All the expected parts were there, assembled with a deft hand in workmanlike fashion, but I got no real sense of their being living, feeling people behind the masks presented. The predatory teacher, especially, was poorly drawn - assembled almost entirely out of stock materials. In fact, both characters were stereotypes to a great extent. The real originality displayed here was in the denoument, which was foreshadowed to be the end of the affair, but ended up as a continuation of the woman's addiction to a lying sexual predator for the thrills he provides; because in her insecurity she feel that this is her only chance at even erzatz happiness. There was no change or development in Janet as a character because of her experiences with Jake, she ended up as nothing more than a convienience to be used.
***
Story "B" - 3,140 words - As I have already said, there a dozen or so easily corrected problems with this story from a technical standpoint. Those aside, I felt this story truly incorporated the title throughout. The pacing was exemplary, starting out glacially then rising and falling up to the pentultimate climax (and the climax was a sexual climax; this being erotica I thought that was apropos), with an epilogue that made the story stronger. In a few short paragraphs, the author entirely reversed the theme of the story from waiting and a long slow deterioration towards death to one of rebirth and life.
The use of John, the main character, as the storyteller was effective and helped me as a the reader identify with the protaganist. The dramatic visualization was adept, using sounds, smells, visuals and lighting to set the tone. Making the projector itself (Vitalux - Latin for "light of life") a full character in the story, almost more-so than the mysterious woman, instead of a simple metaphor was a wonderful idea and handled with skill.
The vampire plot element nearly threw me out of the story as the foreshadowing for that was stuffed in fairly close to the reveal, but the author brought me back by avoiding the cliché that Dana feeding on the protaganist, or even worse, converting him to one of the undead would have been.
I'm not quite sure whether the inheritance of the theater added or detracted from the story, it seems a little too happily ever after.
We are not directly told a lot about Dana, the female character - outside of physical descriptions - until late in the story. That helps maintain her air of mystery. Yet the author succesfully leaves us with a real sense of both the narrarator, John, and the woman Dana, as actual people.
The title and cinematic theme was integrated into the story in divers ways; the setting, alternating scenes of dark and light, the over-all film noir tone, as a plot device, and through the backstory of lives on hold, waiting, and either flickering out or flaring again to new life.
I have two minor quibbles, both easily fixed. The first is the use of a not-a-word-in-english "pharmacia" which I suppose was meant to be pharmacopeia. The second is the use of "Cellulose" to refer to film when what was probably meant was "Celluloid". I'm surprised the author missed these.
All in all, quite an enganging and satisfying read.
****
What folows is a digression and concerns just a single word out of the entire story. In my defense, it did take me out of things for a minute or two.
The author misused the word "Cellulose": an organic polysaccharide that, together with Lignin, forms the bulk of wood and most plant fibers. What the author likely meant was "Celluloid": a thermoplastic polymer of Nitrocellulose and Camphor used for film stock by the Kodak Corporation under the trade name "Nitrate" film prior to the development of acetate based "Safety Stock" film circa 1951.
This seems like a minor point, but it is the very reason for the profession of projectionist - which was a position requiring a good bit of safety training in addition to diverse mechanical skills, to constantly monitor the projector while films were being shown. Celluloid was, in fact, plasticized guncotton and extremely flamable. An ignited canister of Celluloid film will actually burn underwater. In fact, powdered film stock made from discarded prints was the most common explosive for special effects use in the film industry as late as the 1970's. Nitrate film deteriorates to either powder or goo, depending on the storage conditions, as the nitric acid released from the film stock eventually breaks down the polymer. It is still highly flamable in both these forms.
Thus the genesis of the commonly misquoted 1919 argument of Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. (in the seminal free speech case of Shrenk vs. United States) suggesting "falsely yelling fire in a crowded theater" as not being protected speech. Theater fires were actually a fairly common occurance about that time in history due to the dangers inherent in the highly combustible film stock in near proximity to primitive high intensity light sources operating at high temperatures, which eventually led to the legal requirement of fireproof projection rooms and the separate profession of projectionist.
It also explains the frequency of fires that occurred at several motion picture studios; fires that have destroyed so many of the early movies.
End of digression.
****
Please excuse my disjointed ramblings as I composed these comments in snatches during a day long visit by my relatives. And forgive any errors in perception or misused literary terms, I have no background in the area of literary analysis to base my comments on; only a lot of reading.
Congratulations to both writers on their fine efforts.
John
~massivereader is all talked out now~
Serena J
Mar 2, 2009, 9:39:58 AM3/2/09
to storie...@googlegroups.com
Alright. I've had time to read the analysis and consider my response. I've looked at the snow falling in my backyard and I've had my cup of lemon tea.
I DEMAND A RECOUNT!
Or at least I want my bribe money back!!!
Seriously, Jekke congratulations on a job well done! Yours was definately a more creative interpretation. And while I'm not a fan of vampires (I tend to play Werewolf or Mage!) I absolutely adore the old movie theme!
Ok, so I guess this means three things:
1) Shannon, I'm in! I'll buy the first round at the loser club
2) I'll do some editing and post on the SOL Showdown today or tomorrow - where the real world can redeme my good writing name!!
3) Following in the tradition already set, I guess I'm the next Moderator!!!
Thank you Jekke, Shannon, Rache, MassiveReader and TheBlackKnight - I couldn't have lost with out you :-)!!!
SerenaJ
|
Jekke Bladt
Mar 2, 2009, 11:05:46 AM3/2/09
to storie...@googlegroups.com
Celluloid! I had a feeling I was botching that word. Given time, I'm
pretty sure I would have caught it.
pretty sure I would have caught it.
Anyone out there who has never written a story in three hours, I
highly recommend the experience. It was a bit like walking a tightrope
for the first time buck naked. Even if you don't fall, you're not sure
you want anyone to see the results.
I took this on mostly because it put me so far out of my element. I
tend to write long, meandering character pieces until the interaction
of the characters suggests a story, then pare down the preamble and
take it from there. Comparably, John and Dana had to be drawn with a
few, sparse strokes and I was forced to actually know the plot of my
story before I started writing it, to focus on timing and structure as
I went rather than as an editing exercise. Truly, my inner prima donna
was insulted to be so restrained.
I'm hoping this will be a kick-start to get me back to solo writing.
In the three-year interim since I last posted on SOL, I've probably
started fifty stories. Finishing has been a problem. I'm going to try
to set myself some arbitrary deadlines and see if I can meet them.
First arbitrary deadline: I'm giving myself until Sunday at midnight
to clean up and post "The Last Flicker." I would be quicker, but I
really want the first thing I post after such a long drought to be
polished.
I thought Serena did an excellent job of capturing the spirit of the
title and wrote an awesome story. After reading it, I didn't think I
had a chance of winning this.
--Jekke / VA
--
"[T]his hate stuff, this rooting for the administration to fail...is
un-American, unbecoming, and unacceptable."
-- Bill O'Reilly, April 6, 2007
The Black Knight
Mar 2, 2009, 2:31:38 PM3/2/09
to storiesonline
Jekke Bladt allegedly wrote:
> I thought Serena did an excellent job of capturing the spirit of the
> title and wrote an awesome story. After reading it, I didn't think I
> had a chance of winning this.
I thought that both stories did an excellent job incorporating the
> I thought Serena did an excellent job of capturing the spirit of the
> title and wrote an awesome story. After reading it, I didn't think I
> had a chance of winning this.
title.
Flickering candle, flickering screen... either works. I'd noticed the
celluloid gaffe, but the repeated mishandles of dialog
punctuation/capitalization in Serana's story drew me out of the story
more... (Serena, blame Moghal for that. I got so used to fixing that
in his story that I usually catch it... and beside that, when there
are
only two people who speak in a story, 'he said'/'she said' isn't worth
including, usually. Those were the biggest technical flaws that
bothered
me.)
And really, a story that builds up to a non-action (like story A)
just
doesn't compete very well. It (story A) was a study in angst... and
a soliloquy from that Scottish play could sum it up quite well.
Interesting that this 'Battle of the Sexes' Showdown was decided
along gender lines. I can't believe I'm the only one to notice that.
Serena J
Mar 2, 2009, 4:34:13 PM3/2/09
to storie...@googlegroups.com
Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow
Creeps this petty pace from day
To day
And all our yesterday's have lighted fools the way to dusty death
Out
Out breif candle
Life's but a walking shadow
A poor player who struts and frets his hour upon the stage and is heard no more
It is a tale
Told by an idiot
Full of sound and fury
And then is heard no more
(I'm afraid someone will have to verify that. My copy of the Scottish play is not at hand.)
(Thanks for the punctuation/capitolization heads up. I never notice those things.)
|
From: The Black Knight <cm0...@hotmail.com> |
Homer Vargas
Mar 2, 2009, 5:10:58 PM3/2/09
to storie...@googlegroups.com
My stories can be read on: http://www.asstr.org/files/Authors/Vargas; http://www.asstr.org/~Vargas/stories.html http://www.mcstories.com http://www.eroticstories.com; http://storiesonline.net http://www.literotica.com http://www.the-impregnorium.com --- On Mon, 3/2/09, Serena J <sere...@yahoo.com> wrote: |
From: Serena J <sere...@yahoo.com> |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tim Merrigan
Mar 2, 2009, 5:30:40 PM3/2/09
to storie...@googlegroups.com
Serena J wrote:
> Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow
> Creeps this petty pace from day
> To day
> And all our yesterday's have lighted fools the way to dusty death
> Out
> Out breif candle
> Life's but a walking shadow
> A poor player who struts and frets his hour upon the stage and is
> heard no more
> It is a tale
> Told by an idiot
> Full of sound and fury
> And then is heard no more
> (I'm afraid someone will have to verify that. My copy of the Scottish
> play is not at hand.)
> (Thanks for the punctuation/capitolization heads up. I never notice
> those things.)
> SJ
>
> Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow
> Creeps this petty pace from day
> To day
> And all our yesterday's have lighted fools the way to dusty death
> Out
> Out breif candle
> Life's but a walking shadow
> A poor player who struts and frets his hour upon the stage and is
> heard no more
> It is a tale
> Told by an idiot
> Full of sound and fury
> And then is heard no more
> (I'm afraid someone will have to verify that. My copy of the Scottish
> play is not at hand.)
> (Thanks for the punctuation/capitolization heads up. I never notice
> those things.)
> SJ
>
*Macbeth:*
To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
Macbeth Act 5, scene 5, 19–28
<http://www.enotes.com/macbeth-text/act-v-scene-v#mac-5-5-21>
Google is your friend
--
I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America,
and to the republic which it established, one nation, from many peoples,
promising liberty and justice for all.
Feel free to use the above variant pledge in your own postings.
Tim Merrigan
Serena J
Mar 2, 2009, 5:31:17 PM3/2/09
to storie...@googlegroups.com
Signifying nothing!!!!!!
God Damn It! I knew I was missing something!! Thanks Papi!!! --- On Mon, 3/2/09, Homer Vargas <varg...@yahoo.com> wrote: |
Serena J
Mar 2, 2009, 5:38:14 PM3/2/09
to storie...@googlegroups.com
Still, not bad from memory considering that I haven't played Mac since 1988 or so. SJ
(And if I meant Lady Mac, I'd have said Lady Mac.)
--- On Mon, 3/2/09, Tim Merrigan <tp...@ca.rr.com> wrote: |
From: Tim Merrigan <tp...@ca.rr.com> |
Switch Blayde
Mar 2, 2009, 5:38:42 PM3/2/09
to SOL-google-group
> To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
> Creeps this petty pace from day
> To day
> And all our yesterday's have lighted fools the way to dusty death
> To day
> And all our yesterday's have lighted fools the way to dusty death
Wow, that Bill guy sure can write.
Switch
> Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 14:30:40 -0800
> From: tp...@ca.rr.com
> To: storie...@googlegroups.com
Switch
> Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 14:30:40 -0800
> From: tp...@ca.rr.com
> To: storie...@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: Showdown II: "The Final Flicker" -- Results
>
>
Express your personality in color! Preview and select themes for Hotmail®. See how.
Homer Vargas
Mar 2, 2009, 6:33:25 PM3/2/09
to storie...@googlegroups.com
Miss Beaver was great. (Not that anyone then knew what a "beaver" was.) She was about 50, but well dressed and elegant. (No little Homer did not lust for her, not understanding the concept of MILFism.) Years later I learned that the girls in the class all knew she had a boyfriend in a nearby big city and went to visit him every weekend.
She also had us memorize
Whan that April with his shores sote... |
The Black Knight
Mar 2, 2009, 9:21:27 PM3/2/09
to storiesonline
y'all wrote:
> Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow
> Creeps this petty pace from day
> To day
> And all our yesterday's have lighted fools the way to dusty death
> Out
> Out brief candle
> Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow
> Creeps this petty pace from day
> To day
> And all our yesterday's have lighted fools the way to dusty death
> Out
> Life's but a walking shadow
> A poor player who struts and frets his hour upon the stage and is heard no more
> It is a tale
> Told by an idiot
> Full of sound and fury
> [Signifying nothing.]
> A poor player who struts and frets his hour upon the stage and is heard no more
> It is a tale
> Told by an idiot
> Full of sound and fury
The last line was off... and something of the rest isn't ringing
true... but I don't remember the first half clearly enough...
> (I'm afraid someone will have to verify that. My copy of the Scottish play is not at hand.)
> (Thanks for the punctuation/capitolization heads up. I never notice those things.)
that I almost can't not spot it anymore.
Mlle.Euphrosine
Mar 2, 2009, 10:51:08 PM3/2/09
to storiesonline
She should have died hereafter;
There would have been a time for such a word.
To the last syllable of recorded time,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
~Zine
There would have been a time for such a word.
To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day
To the last syllable of recorded time,
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
V,v
Signifying nothing.
~Zine
just-this-guy
Mar 3, 2009, 7:59:57 AM3/3/09
to storiesonline
Do you mean Bill Gates ???
Is this something run through MS Word grammar check?
On Mar 2, 2:38 pm, Switch Blayde <switch_bla...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
> > Creeps this petty pace from day
> > To day
> > And all our yesterday's have lighted fools the way to dusty death
>
> Wow, that Bill guy sure can write.
>
> Switch
>
>
>
>
>
> > Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 14:30:40 -0800
> > From: t...@ca.rr.com
> _________________________________________________________________
> Express your personality in color! Preview and select themes for Hotmail®.http://www.windowslive-hotmail.com/LearnMore/personalize.aspx?ocid=TX...
Is this something run through MS Word grammar check?
On Mar 2, 2:38 pm, Switch Blayde <switch_bla...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
> > Creeps this petty pace from day
> > To day
> > And all our yesterday's have lighted fools the way to dusty death
>
> Wow, that Bill guy sure can write.
>
> Switch
>
>
>
>
>
> > Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 14:30:40 -0800
> Express your personality in color! Preview and select themes for Hotmail®.http://www.windowslive-hotmail.com/LearnMore/personalize.aspx?ocid=TX...
Tim Merrigan
Mar 3, 2009, 2:51:29 PM3/3/09
to storie...@googlegroups.com
just-this-guy wrote:
> Do you mean Bill Gates ???
>
> Is this something run through MS Word grammar check?
>
> On Mar 2, 2:38 pm, Switch Blayde <switch_bla...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
>>> Creeps this petty pace from day
>>> To day
>>> And all our yesterday's have lighted fools the way to dusty death
>>>
>> Wow, that Bill guy sure can write.
>>
>> Switch
>>
> Do you mean Bill Gates ???
>
> Is this something run through MS Word grammar check?
>
> On Mar 2, 2:38 pm, Switch Blayde <switch_bla...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
>>> Creeps this petty pace from day
>>> To day
>>> And all our yesterday's have lighted fools the way to dusty death
>>>
>> Wow, that Bill guy sure can write.
>>
>> Switch
>>
Naw, I think he means the vibrating lance guy.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages