Talk:The Scientist's Monologue/@comment-26084396-20150628062627/@comment-26508991-20150702172042

It's a monologue, which is a person talking to themselves. The scientist was experimenting on himself. It is the internal dialogue of a scientist who has lost his mind. The descriptions are intentionally arcane and scattered. Each of the three stories I've written showcase a different mental illness and therefore have a different style of narration. This one displays Obsessive Compulsive-flavored Schizophrenia. The Baron's Monologue was the self-righteous and, in some ways, self-pitying justification of a sociopath for all of his actions. The narration for that was very purposeful. Why wouldn't it be? He hadn't done anything wrong.

I don't see how the narrator talking about his belief in God impacts the alterations. It was just to display the depths of his insanity and how he fancied himself divine.

It's not fun if the ending is obvious from the beginning. But between the fact that it IS a monologue (i.e. one person talking to nobody/themselves) and the ending line, I would think that after reading the entire story it would be pretty clear. Indeed, the creepiness of all three of the things I've written thus far stem from the fact that there is nobody else there and it IS a monologue.

I'm sorry you didn't like it, but I would venture to guess that it simply isn't for you. There are very critically acclaimed pieces, Memento comes to mind, that are far more extreme examples of the things you decried in this pasta.