on the nature of unreasonable questions

I find that it’s always best

to ask at least 4 *unreasonable questions

before **breakfast

(at least)

the first two, well

those are just warm ups, really

but by the third, things should be getting so toasty hot,

so brain-bendingly unreasonable,

that the idea of nodding off after ***lunch sounds

like a distinct impossibility.

and what of the fourth question?

well, that’s just there to make sure q no. 3 wasn’t a fluke

—a convenient coincidence or something akin to beginner’s luck

see,

the 4th makes it real

—makes you a serial success

so now, nearly nothing else matters

now you can let the mid-afternoon mishaps fly

and watch as the deadlines elegantly loom

great tapestries of nervousless beauty

(or perhaps the better word is weave?)

because here, in this unreasonable state of profound absurdity

—here, in the somewhere between twilight

and just after dawn,

why, you can walk right through it all, perfectly unharmed

riding on the wings of…

well, of whatever strange, magnificent beast

that first comes to your verdant mind

and to think:

if you can accomplish all this before breakfast,

what other treasure does the day hold?

—

* for those who do not intuitively understand what an unreasonable question is, fear not; provided, here, is a level 1 example: why do mid-sized luxury sedans only drive upside down in underground tunnels?  (disclaimer: please do not, in any way, let this rudimentary example limit your imagination’s own questions.)

** assuming, of course, that you eat breakfast. if you don’t, even better. then you can improvise.

*** surely, you at least eat lunch.

Previous
Previous

rain/morphology

Next
Next

wait, what/