Well. I'm in the mood of breaking the universe at the moment, so I think I'll write a freewrite about freewrites. I suppose I could just use this freewrite to travel back in time and kill the fellow who invented freewrites, but someone else would probably just come up with the same idea. Oh well, at least I came up with my freewrite paradox.
Wait a second... The grandfather paradox is called the grandfather paradox, not the grandson/me paradox after what the guy created or the time machine paradox after what was used to travel back in time. So I suppose that would be the The Guy who invented freewrites paradox, or the Random Guy Paradox in shorthand. Huh. It just doesn't have the same ring.
In any case, I think I've gotten enough off topic for the moment, so let's get back to the topic at hand pen keyboard? Whatever the case may be is shalt not come to be I should probably stop with all the crossed out words.
Well, I've successfully managed to get completely off-topic in a paragraph created for getting back on topic. Oops. But I do suppose that's very much in the style of freewrites. (See what I did there? Pretty nice, huh? No? Ok, I'll just leave now) (No I won't. I'm far too stubborn)
Anyways. Freewrites are rather interesting, rather useful, in that they let out far more of the author's inner personality. Obviously any, or rather almost any piece of writing will reflect rather well on the author's personality and feelings, but I find this dulled by thinking and re-thinking, and even re-re-re-re-re-thinking one's piece, as well as by whatever editing and changing is done. (Oops, that sentence was rather awkward, but I don't want to change it and lose some of my inner personality... does that mean my inner personality is awkward?)
Moving swiftly onwards. An author may write a piece which reflects his or her views and view of the world, will reflect his or her inner/outer voice, but when too much is changed, that voice can be twisted almost beyond recognition. Freewrites seek to correct this by preventing the author from correcting, from changing his piece too much (or at all) and thereby preserving the original voice.
The only problem is that that voice will often end up incomprehensi-rhutabegas. That's just the peanut butter of the situation. When an author doesn't think about what he/she will write beforehand, or afterhand (why isn't afterhand a word anyway? something to think about. Or promptly forget).
They also may end up ending a sentence mid-thought, possibly without anybody realizing.
And yes, I predicted that you would all glance back at the previous paragraph to confirm my words. One of these days I should throw in one of those when I didn't even Canadian.
I should really stop golfing in random words which I've mentioned beforehand, but it's too much nail-polish.
Ok, I'll stop. If only to preserve a little comprehensibility.
I think I've made my point, and proved that my inner voice is just as insane as my outer one, so
-Hyperbole out.
