its been a long long time since i posted on here, so i thought i would put up something for you all to read that i have been working on for a while
let me know what you think

Two men enter
Middle aged/ under 60
They sit down at the table
Each has a cup of tea in front of them

- do you take sugar?


- I didn?t think so

- really?

- yes, I could tell from you?re actions

- how so?

- well they say that people who take sugar in their tea are the kind of people who have a big personality, always wanting to be the centre of attention.

- is that true?

- I believe so, I could tell that you did not have sugar as people who are more mature in their nature, not necessarily more sophisticated, but more of a thinker than a performer tend to have no sugar as they don?t feel the need. It?s a sub conscious action. You may not think it as a person but your brain does. Hence you don?t take sugar.

- do you take sugar?

- you tell me?

- well it depends on how I interpret your personality and body language

- what is your interpretation of me?

- if I look at your body language, they way you sit etc. I would make the presumption that you do not take sugar.

- how did you reach that conclusion?

- but if I analyze you closer I?m not too sure. If you look at yourself, you sit with your legs crossed. Now do I Interpret that as a sign of confidence, pushing you towards the performer category, or do I interpret it as a lack of confidence, you sit cross legged for protection.

- interesting theory?

- however you sit with a very relaxed posture, showing you are not easily intimidated by public appearance, but you have a short attention span, with your eye?s constantly looking around, possibly to see if anyone is watching you.

- you have really thought about this?

- no, not at all
- you seem to have a lot of detail?s to analyze

- but we do that everyday, we may not be conscious of it all the time, but everyday we are constantly analyzing people. The way they look, the way they walk and talk. Every time we see a person we analyze them, it?s human nature.

- but what you are talking about is the human nature to judge a person on appearances.

- am I?

- yes, what you are talking about is the way, when we see a person, we judge them, decide what kind of person they are, whether or not we like them, before talking to them and finding out if we were right. Usually we find that we are wrong, but because we have already made a judgement about that person, it?s rare that our opinion on that particular person changes.

- that?s true. I read an article in the paper the other day about that.

- what was it about?

- it was talking about when people go for a job interview. Usually the interviewer makes a yes/no decision within three seconds of looking at the person.

- but in the situation of an interview, surely opinions change once they talk to the person they are interviewing.

- believe It or not the writer of the article thought that as well. So she conducted an experiment, where she set up a fictional job interview. She asked the interviewer to interview three different people. They gave her a rating device, which when she turned one way it registered that she liked the person, then when she turned it the other way it showed she disliked the person.

- what was the outcome of that?

-well when they looked at the results it showed that within the first ten seconds the interviewer had decided who she liked the best and her opinion through the rest of the interview never changed.

- it seems to me then that if that?s how interviews work now, they should be over in ten seconds, a straight yes or no. interview over. No more need for talking

- well is there any need for conversation in general anymore?

- depends on what you have to say

- exactly, and how do you know if what you are going to say is worthy of conversation.

- the term think before you speak springs to mind. But it?s impossible to tell whether or not what you?re going to say is relevant to both the audience and the topic at hand.

- plus there is the factor of not knowing which direction one person?s words can go in.

- how do you mean?

- well think about what we have talked about since we sat down. We have discussed personality traits, body language analysis and human judgement, do you remember how the conversation started??..do you take sugar in your tea.
- it is often the simpler questions that get the greatest discussions.

- true as that may be, is it needed? Did we really need to discuss all those points in such detail?


- we didn?t gain anything from that conversation, apart from maybe personal enjoyment, we didn?t gain any knowledge in the subject.

- personal enjoyment is important in a conversation, if you are not enjoying a conversation then it goes stale and your attention wanders. Turning the conversation between two into a conversation between one.

- but enjoyment depends on the reasons why you have a conversation in the first place. Are you talking to voice an opinion, give advice, deliver news?

- or are they talking just to talk. There is no point in the words they are saying, but they want to converse because they feel the need.

- the same could be said about writing.

- in comparison?

- when you write, are you writing with intention, or are you writing in the hope to find an intention? Scribbling off pages upon pages of dialogue, in the hope that whilst you are writing you will find a purpose for the words you have wrote.

- and do you usually find a purpose?

- in all honesty?no. you can write seven hundred pages and still not get anywhere. You could have all this deep meaningful dialogue full of information, humour or tragedy. But still not have a reason for it?s existence.

- basically the words on the page are worthless and never-ending. They just constantly build to a climax, but never actually find one.


(they both laugh then get up to leave)

-it?s a good job no-one has thought to just write with no intention and try and turn it into a play or something.

- I don?t know, it could work!
Around the ragged rocks, the rugged rascal ran.

My D-Music
You wrote in a blue font, that makes you like the sky, or else you're scared of the sky and think by writing in blue it means the sky will accept you as an friend.

This was great Gaz. Good comeback.

It kept my intrest most of the way, was well written and the ending was great.

I could really relate to this part:

Scribbling off pages upon pages of dialogue, in the hope that whilst you are writing you will find a purpose for the words you have wrote.
or is it because i hate the sky but i feel that buy writing in blue i can lull the sky into a false sense of security and once it is in my trust destroy it from the inside

thanks connor for the comment!
Around the ragged rocks, the rugged rascal ran.

My D-Music
this isn't my kinda of thing, to tell the truth, but this piece makes quite a nice read. watch out for spellin, there's a couple of things u should correct - that "you're" on the fifth line of the dialogue should be a "your", for instance. overall, it flows well as a conversation and the language is quite appropriate. some of the longer sentences could do with sm changes in the punctuation, to help the reader get the intonation u intend it to have, but yeah, that's just bein picky. other than those small details, this piece is fairly well written.

- when you write, are you writing with intention, or are you writing in the hope to find an intention? Scribbling off pages upon pages of dialogue, in the hope that whilst you are writing you will find a purpose for the words you have wrote.

this part was easily the best in the whole thing, it's bound to be smth most of us can relate to in this forum and moreover the wordin is just perfect.

as i said b4, this isn't my kind of thing, but i must say it makes a good change to the usual stuff here, and it's well written and pretty enjoyable. good job

so who do i have to kill to get a crit? --> Memory

(e-cookie for whoever spots the alliteration, ha)

y cuando llegue el momento, sólo el viento se llevará lo que siento; y cuando acabe mi suerte, sólo en la muerte estaré fuerte y despierto...
wow...this is exactly like normal conversations go...straying starting of with one topic and over the course of the conversation you stray and stray and stray...it is a nicely written piece...thumbs up
On the sixth day God created mankind, I say it is a waste of time.
My project: _simple_city
I like it.
Quote by Johnnyboy66
Maybe you just suck at the guitar?

Quote by dudeman_andy
feed a pigeon bicarbonate of soda, let it swell up for a while. then feed it to the dogs and

BOOM head shot!

(pigeons explode after having bicarbonate of soda, they cant fart. stupid pigeons.)