The first man says to the second:
"Ever thought about who made all this?"
The second man says, "No."
"Well I happen to know Him."
"That so?"
"He spoke to me personally, in fact, not two hours before you got here."

The second man counts the stars.

"Well, do you want to hear what he said?" asks the first man.
"Do you want to tell me?"
"Of course. Do you not think it important, perhaps, beneficial?
The first man sweats as the second examines a blade of grass.

"Well, alright, I'll tell you anyway (cocky bastard)."

"That's all of it?"
"Are you satisfied?"
The second man skips a stone, and then another.
"You were searching for something; have you found it?"
"Found what? I saw God!"
"And he found it for you?"
"He told me how it all came to be, why we breathe."
"You believed him?"
"Of course!"
I want Super Saiyan abilities
You seem to have a knack for writing dialogue but I found the theme rather boring and juvenile. The writing is beyond the subject matter for sure so I'd like to see something like this applied to a more sophisticated topic.


"Art is always and everywhere the secret confession, and at the same time the immortal movement of its time."

I'd like you to elaborate on what you mean by "juvenile" if you don't mind. To me farts and war are juvenile. The second man is juvenile in his own way (so is the first), but I don't consider the subject matter juvenile so much as basic.

I find the basics fascinating.
I want Super Saiyan abilities
Last edited by rebelmidget at May 16, 2011,
Basic is actually a much better word and I apologize if I came off as rude by using "juvenile". I just feel like such a blunt commentary on God's existence is a relatively immature subject matter for a piece of this style. Had you made this theme a little subtler, it would have seemed more sophisticated but in the context of a very direct dialogue piece, I'd recommend choosing a more interesting theme or changing the style of the piece. This is not to say the writing is poor, though. It most certainly wasn't.

"Art is always and everywhere the secret confession, and at the same time the immortal movement of its time."

Thanks for the clarification. I see this piece as more of a scene depicting the points of view of both parties. The theist seeing God as reason enough, and the skeptic asking questions, entirely unaroused by the thought. To me that is what causes the divide. Those who feel "God" and those who don't. Christians don't defend the dogma or the church so much as they defend their faith in something beyond comprehension or logic. I want it to be clear that though the skeptic gets the last word, I as a writer do not take a side.
I want Super Saiyan abilities