I am going to write a review.

The category says ’’five most humorous reviews on mouthshut’’. But the request read ’’who will write the funniest review on funniest reviews’’.

This is challenging. (Read as ’’an effort destined to fall flat on its face’’). Tongue in cheek is what I would be inclined to call this. Foot in mouth is what it probably is going to become.

No food in stomach is what it would lead to were I a professional writer. (you can see the ’paradoxical food for thought’ pun coming up.) But if puns were eggs, I could at least make omelets. Chew on that a while.

How can anyone write a review on funny reviews? A funny review is not like a moustache. I could easily write about funny moustaches. I guarantee you will be rolling in the aisles. Laughing, I might hasten to add. Speaking of adding, you might put two and two together, and figure that I really don’t have a clue of what I am going to write about.

Humorous reviews are a strange lot. What possible good could be achieved in telling people about a product, while making them laugh at the same time? Its not a comparable analogy to the proverbial icing on the cake. If people wanted to laugh they would watch M*A*S*H. Of what use would it be to first read a review on M*A*S*H that made them laugh just as hard? The unwanted product of effort would destroy the desired fruits of incentive. Call it ’’having your cake, but not eating it because youre laughing too hard to.’’

(Yes, yes, ’’Laughing too hard’’ , would have worked as well)

One of the (numerous) problems associated with writers of humorous reviews, is that they get carried away with their inane humor and perceived witticisms. The product under review lies cocooned in a ’’somebody else’s problem’’ field. (www.google.com -> ’’somebody else’s problem field’’)

That is to say, its highly unlikely that you will find any meaningful pointers to actual funny reviews, in this review of funny reviews. Perhaps we should request a review for the funniest review on the funniest reviews?

As they say, any problem can be solved by adding a further layer of abstraction.

Please direct all indignant flame mail to me, and not the folks of mouthshut who kindly allow this kind of thing to carry on under the guise of creative writing.