Skip to main content

Am I the only human in the village?

It started out so normally. A (wet) walk down to the post office with Goldie.
But something was wrong. It was too quiet. No sounds. No movement. And then I began to see them.
Where the people had been, were now distorted, horrible monstrosities.
I could only think that aliens had landed.
Converting the villagers into these strange, scarecrow-like figures.
Not a single human being in sight.
Everyone, everyone I knew, all gone.
At first I thought they were like statues...
But as I turned my back, I'm sure one moved.
We reached the post office, saw lights... but decided to run. They were coming after us.
I didn't know if I'd make it back home. But I'm here. Things seem so normal. There's nothing on the radio, just the ordinary news. Could I have dreamed it? No - I have the photographs.

ADDED LATER IN HASTE They're coming. I can hear them. At least half a dozen, moving with a strange, shambling step. I don't think I can keep them out. They're in the house. It's no use, they
Labels:

Comments

  1. Sue Guiney27 April 2009 at 10:38

    Oh well...it was nice knowing you :-)

    ReplyDelete
  2. cromercrox27 April 2009 at 10:44

    I think you need to lie down.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous27 April 2009 at 13:23

    Brian, it's OK at my end of the village......they haven't got as far as Redlands yet. Hopefully we will continue to to remain safe!
    Sarah

    ReplyDelete
  4. Brian Clegg27 April 2009 at 15:19

    Please note, Sarah, it's only a matter of time. No one can escape. Embrace straw.

    [Click]

    The entity Brian Clegg is now fully assimilated - sorry, fully recovered. (Note to self: buy earthling keyboard with backspace key.) There will be no more silly talk of aliens taking over. The photographs above are clearly Photoshopped.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why I hate opera

If I'm honest, the title of this post is an exaggeration to make a point. I don't really hate opera. There are a couple of operas - notably Monteverdi's Incoranazione di Poppea and Purcell's Dido & Aeneas - that I quite like. But what I do find truly sickening is the reverence with which opera is treated, as if it were some particularly great art form. Nowhere was this more obvious than in ITV's 2010 gut-wrenchingly awful series Pop Star to Opera Star , where the likes of Alan Tichmarsh treated the real opera singers as if they were fragile pieces on Antiques Roadshow, and the music as if it were a gift of the gods. In my opinion - and I know not everyone agrees - opera is: Mediocre music Melodramatic plots Amateurishly hammy acting A forced and unpleasant singing style Ridiculously over-supported by public funds I won't even bother to go into any detail on the plots and the acting - this is just self-evident. But the other aspects need some exp
117 comments
Read more

Is 5x3 the same as 3x5?

The Internet has gone mildly bonkers over a child in America who was marked down in a test because when asked to work out 5x3 by repeated addition he/she used 5+5+5 instead of 3+3+3+3+3. Those who support the teacher say that 5x3 means 'five lots of 3' where the complainants say that 'times' is commutative (reversible) so the distinction is meaningless as 5x3 and 3x5 are indistinguishable. It's certainly true that not all mathematical operations are commutative. I think we are all comfortable that 5-3 is not the same as 3-5.  However. This not true of multiplication (of numbers). And so if there is to be any distinction, it has to be in the use of English to interpret the 'x' sign. Unfortunately, even here there is no logical way of coming up with a definitive answer. I suspect most primary school teachers would expands 'times' as 'lots of' as mentioned above. So we get 5 x 3 as '5 lots of 3'. Unfortunately that only wor
25 comments
Read more

Why backgammon is a better game than chess

I freely admit that chess, for those who enjoy it, is a wonderful game, but I honestly believe that as a game , backgammon is better (and this isn't just because I'm a lot better at playing backgammon than chess). Having relatively recently written a book on game theory, I have given quite a lot of thought to the nature of games, and from that I'd say that chess has two significant weaknesses compared with backgammon. One is the lack of randomness. Because backgammon includes the roll of the dice, it introduces a random factor into the play. Of course, a game that is totally random provides very little enjoyment. Tossing a coin isn't at all entertaining. But the clever thing about backgammon is that the randomness is contributory without dominating - there is still plenty of room for skill (apart from very flukey dice throws, I can always be beaten by a really good backgammon player), but the introduction of a random factor makes it more life-like, with more of a sense
6 comments
Read more