Young Writers Society

You know. When I was little I read parts of the third Harry Potter book before I ever went back and discovered the first book. This feels a little like this, as you might have noticed my comment on your more recent chronicle in the McDonald's escapades. I noticed there was a reference to something that had happened previous, but none of the links in the "related works" led me here. It is by chance, as fortuitous as the chance that led you to discover the connected chicken nuggets, that I am here at all.

So let's begin with the untangling. I like the intent behind the double parentheses, and that rhythm is totally necessary, but when you go completely absurd instead of just ridiculous, I think it weakens your delivery. So randomly bringing up the government without any possible logical path to that word makes it seem absurd and lopped together, when I know you can make it solid AND silly.

Next, that first sentence alone seems weird: "despite my reconsiderations"? Not only has it pluralized a noun that can't really be pluralized (but I do that all the time, so I'd be willing to let it go), it's weird to say reconsideration without first having an original consideration. Did you consider McDonald's and the quality of their products? Then later you'd reconsider and think okay, maybe they're okay. So I think that's just a bit confusing and would do well replaced with something like "hesitation" or "previous inclination to inhibition" or something equally as silly but less incorrect.

And last, your last line. What? How can you be asking if you should disturb the universe if you already did.

I'd say rearrange a bit, and put this lovely line right after "by a most minute area of the surface". Spacing it out to its own paragraph will still give it the lovely pause and spotlight it needs. Then "so I did" makes the perfect abrupt ending. What do you think?

PM me or wall post me with comments, 'cause I don't get notifications about replies to reviews and I don't want to rely on even MORE chance to see yours again.

Good luck and keep writing~

Hello Spinelli! I was immediately drawn to this because I thought it looked interesting and I was correct in that assumption. McDonalds has been frequently associated with the dissatisfaction many have with consumer society. Also, the idea of corporations asserting control over the governments of many "developing countries" is also debated. However, unfortunately, though you warned me in the description that your "metaphor" was "obscure," I find this piece not to be "obscure" necessarily, but just disorganized and unsure of itself. Allow me to elaborate.

First of all, as a reader, I feel as if you wrote this for yourself to attempt to make sense of something. I have no problem with this, as that is a common and useful practice. However, when presented to an audience, leaving out details that are just *screaming* to be added is not in your favor. Your writing is very honest and your style is extremely appealing to a modern audience in general and I don't see why you can't use this style to attempt to get the most out of your commentary. I do get the impression of little breadcrumbs left behind to help me navigate through your piece, but for the metaphor to be so unintelligible leaves dissatisfaction. I get the impression, also, that you yourself do not know exactly what it is you're trying to convey as your ideas are so muddled. Even Kerouac, in all of his Beatnik literature, managed to leave a reader with an overall feeling that they discovered something. About the world, about the Author...etc. Thus, I ask you to consider what exactly you are writing about, who you're writing for, and why you are writing this.

Additionally, you write from the perspective of someone who is unfamiliar with some basic traditions of civilization. Do not do this unless you plan on exploring this more in depth. For example

a mysterious force, perhaps called "cooking,'