From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

The art of criticism was established in the distant future by a world that was fed up with being positive about everything. It was ostensibly created to ensure discourse about the holocaust and kite flying was not characterised by value judements such as "equally as good" and "I like kites, but on the other hand...", or, "flying and death is cool, but let's not forget the good work done by all the nouns". The people of the future were all equal... but some longed to be more equal than others, or at least for others to be less equal than they, also, for people who invented original expressions to be given credit and for overly long sentences to be safely deemed unnecessary. So it was agreed that the time machine which had just arrived from further in the future should be used to change the whole of man's history, so that criticism would break up the homogeneous lump that was stuff which happened and the things people thought about it.

What Was To Be Done (Or What is to Be Decided What Was to Be Done)[edit | edit source]

It was originally decided to tackle the big events, such as Sliced Bread, Oscar Wilde's birth and New Coke, but it was suggested that affecting change in a piecemeal manner would have created too many spin-off time lines; dimensions in which Bread would occupy a position similar to that of Judaism, (ie. always have a capital "B") whilst the Sliced variety would cleave everything in its wake. An existence in which people would never eat, only bow towards sandwiches, and always drink Pepsi, staying well clear of any chance of damnation. An existence of diabetes, but uncertainly, obesity.

So, the time machine was disembarked in Ancient Greece, where old men with beards were having a hard time of it. Not any more, Philosophy was created ("Love of Knowledge", or "My Idea is Better Than Your Idea") a School of Thought that had a prohibitive admissions policy:

School of Philosophy Admissions Policy[edit | edit source]

  • Firstly, no children or poor people are allowed to attend. Any child caught philosophising/criticising will be placed in an urn, indefinately. The poor are not clever, but they are big, bigger, municipal urns will be needed.
  • Secondly, a combination of wealth and facial hair are most important in deciding upon entrance: Moustache and a fortune would work equally as well as beard and a bit.
  • Thirdly, if we do not like the look of you, you must know that yours is a look not to be liked. Argument is futile, not least because it is a skill that only we possess.

The rules ran on for many pages, but were mostly concerned with admim and suggested party themes for the annual bash (toga a firm favourite).

And so began a glorious tradition of intelligent urine removal, running through a glorious string of ideas like Facism, Communism, Existentialism, Nihilism, etc etc, down the ages quite splendidly until the arrival of Postmoderism. Criticism began to criticise itself, with the conclusion being that no one could be sure that they were right, or that Beethoven was better than Big Brother. This led to what at the moment would be regarded as a ironic turn of events, some would agree amusing, others not, but this irony will be lost on the future.

Criticism of criticism[edit | edit source]

Some people have criticized critics for being so overly critical. They argue that people and things should be accepted as they are.

Criticism of criticism of criticism[edit | edit source]

Critics of those who criticize criticism argue, that criticizing criticism is just totally hypocritical.

Criticism of criticism of criticism of criticism[edit | edit source]

People who criticize those who critize people who criticize criticism argue that it's not hypocritical at all, because the critics started the whole thing

Criticism of criticism of criticism of criticism of criticism[edit | edit source]


See also[edit | edit source]