From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
This was saved from VFD by means of a full rewrite a couple months ago. It's my first full article, and I wrote this with much guidance from SPIKE. I wanted to see if anyone else would try their hand at editing it before submitting it here. Since no one else has taken a shot at it, I figure it's time to send it here for a promotion. Have fun! Sir "TheSlyPony" Invariably certifiable. 21:51 May 9, 2011 (UTC)
- I think I shall review this. But not right now. Soonish. After I do some other things. But I want to review this. I'm just horrible. 22:41, 10 May 2011
The idea, the angle, the grand funny of the article...
|I'll be honest; I'm not paying attention to who added what, or came up with what, or whatnot, just how it strikes me as it is currently. So, er... don't take this the wrong way, or something. Or possible cake. If only there were a way to work cake into it... everything could use a dash of cake. But that's completely beside the point.
For such a short article, there's a surprisingly large amount here. Layers, I suppose, some which are more effective than others. The notion of it being almost entirely about death, which I suppose is the main one, or at least the most overt, does work rather well, but at times you do seem to deviate a bit - the helper also being serene? Seems like it'd only make sense if the helper going to wind up dead, too, which actually could work rather well... a sort of... partnership, the one more ready aiding the other into oblivion, rather like the notion of assisted suicide? And the different terms - how related to serenity is Nirvana, really? Linking it to Hell, I can see how that's a joke, but it doesn't help with the actual meaning, you know?
Mind, what this notion really needs is more expansion, not even necessarily upon it itself, but on the things it brings up. The stages, the goals, what's so nice about it, how things can turn out at the end - people can die without reaching it, but do they have do die after reaching it? Can they nearly die and maintain the thing? What about folks who've been 'born again'? Taking the literal meaning of that, I mean... it's sort of like being dead. Or something. I dunno, I'm just tossing ideas out.
Anyway, what you may want to worry about more, however, is the thing about the narrator not being so serene an individual. That really doesn't work for me, at least not the way it's currently done; it just disrupts the flow of the piece, when you already have a solid enough concept without it. Instead of random bold Tourettes-esque outbursts, though, maybe if you did something more subtle, that might work. The article would probably have to be a fair bit longer so you could work the stuff into it without it standing out too much, though, and it'd have to be very consistent, tone-wise - consider everything you say, and sometimes change it slightly to indicate the true character of the speaker. If he's good at hiding it for the most part, that he'll be talking about this will probably be a lot more convincing, and you'll also be able to make the differentiation clearer, even without folks realising it. From there, if you have it start out less and build up throughout the piece, that could perhaps work quite well.
The implementation, how funny the article comes out...
|You do have some good jokes here. Better than I tend to do, at least. Some bits aren't very clear what you're saying, awkward prose, mainly. I bring it up here because if I have to reread a line three times to make out what it's saying, chances are the joke won't be nearly so effective afterward - the comment about folks achieving serenity who are saved being deemed insane (or perhaps simply being insane), I only just got what that was even saying. Make the sentence less elaborate and it should be clearer. The rest of it is better, but it's something to be wary of.
The Hitler quote thing seems a little forced - isn't the quote actually from something else? Why use Hitler? The thing explaining how he wrote it down seems out of place, for that matter, but now that I think about it, that may just be because the rest of the section is so lacking. It's about situations, so include more examples, perhaps, instead of less. And if you build up to the list of unpleasant demises and it should be that much funnier.
Your lists, oddly, work. This is unusual for lists, as you may have noticed on VFD... very unusual. But that doesn't mean you can't expand upon them... list the things, and then say a little more, perhaps? Reinforcing the irony of flailing and banging on things, explaining what you mean about the peanuts (And 'high fiber'? What do you mean by that?)...
Mmm, but this ends so straight-forwardly... well, maybe incontinence isn't that straight-forward, but why is it 'other meanings' if there's only one listed? And is that really an 'other meaning'? Or just a loose derivation?
|Prose and formatting |
Appearance, flow, overall presentation...
|List of stuff because I'm not really sure how else to sort it:
The graphics themselves, as well as their humour and relevance...
|I like the images. I'm not just saying that because I made one of them, either. Naw, lovely images, but the way they're used, and perhaps more the layout, that you may want to look to. The first one, well, as much as we all love huge things taking up the entire beginnings of things, it just doesn't make that much sense on it's own. Sure, the thing is still, but it's not exactly an inherently serene image. Decrepit, yes, which is apt to indicate deadity, but as the first thing we see, it's more likely to confuse than to support the point. Add a caption to tie it in, put it off as a more traditional sort of image, or perhaps put it later and use another opening picture entirely, and it would probably work better. Lovely photo, but... eh.
As for the other two, I see what you're trying to do here, but there's not enough text to pull it off, especially after the image-free sections above; it's too uneven. Some of us are on rather wide screens, too... well, on my screen, the section they go with only goes down about a third of the hight of the images. Then the next section goes down another third, and the last third is just white space... it doesn't really work.
You should do something about that, or something. Lay them out more even-like, maybe. Get more text. Etc.
Anything else... or not...
|Salted peanuts. Are you allergic?|
|Final score |
05:38, 12 May 2011
|Sorry this took so long, mon... seems like I'm saying that with every review I do, these days. Arg... anyhow, hopefully this will help, good luck, etc... you know where to find me if you have any questions, concerns, comments, or need to kill me in some unpleasant manner.|