A Reading From The Book of Crazy, Part III
PARTS: One and Two, any two people
ONE: So, I was talking to
Tobias earlier, and I got this idea...
TWO: That's the sort of statement, that while seeming
innocuous, really raises a lot of other questions before you can go on.
ONE: Oh yeah?
TWO: The first, you know, sort of thing, that I think I should ask is -- the only Tobias you and I both know is your dog. Were you talking to him or someone else?
ONE: He’s
such a cute little puppy.
TWO: Oh, ok.
ONE: Anyway, I was talking to Tobias earlier and I got this idea. We should start naming dogs “Doug” . Or Douglas, you know, depending on your brevity preference. And then I think that we should intentionally pronounce that vowel
ambiguously. Dog Doge Doug Duge. Deferentially demonstrating daring diction.
TWO: Dandy.
ONE: See, this is different than just naming your
dog “Dog”. That’s taking a common noun and making it proper. This strategy, however, allows you to raise an army of dogs who won’t know the difference between common and proper nouns!
TWO: And it might have some sort of effect on humans too.
ONE: Right, but that’s just an
ancillary benefit for the ambiguity assault. Soon I would have an army of doggy Dougs. And none of them would understand the distinction between common and proper nouns. Ha ha ha.
TWO: What would you do with your army?
ONE: I’m not sure. Step one is a doggy army easily controlled due to their proper/common common/proper ignorance.
Step three is world domination. I’m still working on step two.
TWO: Well, you’d better make it one hell of a step.