Something I wrote for Creative Writing

The first line is from a so-called autobiographical account from a book by Leila Ahmed. The rest is pretty much me with a serious lack of sleep...

The Saad Birth of 1982 would come to be thought of by those who lived through it and also by historians as the pivotal moment in the life of Saad Akhtar. Fortunately for us, this birth, or those who lived through it—or lived due to it—is of no concern in our current scenario.

Currently, we are endeavoring to discover why it is that the chicken felt the need to cross the road. It has been presented to us by Dr. Inatra Manson Nutts that the chicken felt the need to cross the road because of its inclination towards a particular rooster. Dr. I. M. Nutts also attempted to prove to us that the motive behind the chicken going across the path was deeper then just the physical attraction that the chicken felt for the rooster under investigation.

This was proven by the doctor by assuming that the chicken was Nutts herself. If we assume that the chicken was Nutts, then we can attempt to discover whether or not the deeper emotion expounded by the doctor holds any relevance. However, from a slightly different perspective, the rooster could also be assumed to be Nutts and this would change the scenario completely.

As has probably become obvious by now, this discussion has nothing whatsoever to do with Saad Akhtar or his birth in 1982 and even less to do with Leila Ahmed and the Suez Canal. However, an interesting discovery, and a great revelation at this stage is that our problem is connected to the writing of Leila Ahmed as the concerned rooster on the other side of the road was named Khedive Ismael.
Interestingly enough, this rooster was neither Egyptian nor Turkish neither did it ever have any relation with anyone from the two nationalities. Therefore, its name and its connection to any persons living or dead is purely coincidental. However, the events narrated in this paper are not fictitious and though resemblances to dead people may be coincidental, resemblance to any persons sane or insane are genuinely intentional. All references to people resembling chickens or other poultry related products are intended only to amuse.

At this stage we would like to clarify that the authors of this piece—all right, author—are concerned with the carpet-like appearance of a certain individual’s hair and would recommend an immediate visit to the barber, gardener or near-by dry-cleaner. We would also like to suggest the removal of all persons named Tina from the vicinity of this paper for reasons we would like to with-hold from the general public. We can divulge that the affinity of a certain Tina towards Beef is rather disturbing and should be medically treated. Also, his willingness to write “sheep upon sheep” of praises for his beloved is a rather peculiar display of affection and seems to be symptomatic of a severe mental handicap.

Before concluding this preface to our actual discussion, the authors (yes, me!) would like to transfer all responsibility for any repercussions onto people who have first names beginning with S-a-a-d and ending in i who may or may not be enrolled in the Creative Writing class. One name we wished to mention but could not fit in anywhere in this discussion was the creation of the great Bart Simpson: Amanda Hugginkis.