Thread: The Most Succulent Cupcake Ever Made

First post! I would appreciate some feedback on this little snippet I wrote. Thanks.

The Most Succulent Cupcake Ever Made

"These cupcakes are delicious."
"Don't do that."
"Don't do what?"
"Say these cupcakes are delicious when they taste like dirt."
"You don't really mean that."
"Of course I mean that. I don't care if your parents told you this was an award winning recipe, they taste like D-I-R-T, dirt."
"You're just not giving them a chance. If you open yourself up a little and try it you will find they are delicious."
"Open myself up!? I have tried these cupcakes. I know everything about them. I've read the recipe and I probably know it better than you. Trout in a cupcake. Really? Regardless, they are disgusting and you should open yourself up to the idea that you're wrong."
"Well, one day I'm going to stand on an award stage with these cupcakes. How do you think you will feel then. I mean what if you're wrong and these are the best cupcakes ever made."
"I have to be honest, were I picking cupcakes to stand by, I would pick one not covered in prune icing."
"You're being irrational. You don't realize what this cupcake has done for you."
"Done for me?"
"Yes, done for you. It was made just for you. I understand it may have a flavor you don't like at first but it still is here and is going to provide you sustenance for another day. You are nothing if not ungrateful."
"I think I can handle that on my own. I don't need to eat a cupcake I never wanted."
"How do you know. How do you know that you won't leave here today and lose your job, lose your marriage, lose everything you love because you rejected a kind gift. It's bad karma to reject a tasty dessert you know."
"These cupcakes aren't tasty. The molecular gastronomy course I took tells me that this cupcake is scientifically nauseating. I'm sorry, but you've been fooled."
"My whole family loves these cupcakes. They have served them at every dinner my whole life. We wouldn't be doing that if they were disgusting. Some of my other friends are chefs and they like them too. That's proof enough for me."
"The fact that you know more people that believe these horrid cupcakes are delicious doesn't really change the facts, regardless of their credentials."
"I'm going to say this again, what if you're wrong. What if these turn out to be the best cupcakes you've ever tasted and you are missing out on something great because you're not giving it a chance."
"I'm not wrong. They are disgusting. I can prove it in a variety of ways. You haven't given me any reason to believe otherwise except the fact that you believe otherwise."
"I give up. You're just delusional."

Flapjack - Absolutely perfect. A delight. Two characters accurately drawn with nothing but the words they speak. This is something I've been trying to achieve myself, and you've proven it can be done.

Thank you for posting this.

Given your moniker and the subject of this piece, are you by chance a chef de cuisine?

Thank you Garza! I do dabble but I am no a chef. However, I suffer from an unholy attraction to cupcakes. The topic here is something I feel is rather absurd so I decided a discussion over cupcakes went well with it.

Nice!

Originally Posted by Flapjack

"It was made just for you. I understand it may have a flavor you don't like at first but it still is here and is going to provide you sustenance for another day.."

I sense a theme running through this dialogue! This may be far-fetched, but I think this part sounds like a metaphor for something else... maybe love, or the many twists and turns of everyday life.

Originally Posted by Trides

I sense a theme running through this dialogue! This may be far-fetched, but I think this part sounds like a metaphor for something else... maybe love, or the many twists and turns of everyday life.

There is definitely an underlying metaphor here. Actually it's pretty simple. The hint is Pascal's wager. I used it twice in the form most people use in an argument: "what if your wrong?" I'll let you guess from there.

In these types of discussions the end result is always each side viewing the other's stance as delusional. They believe that, "the other person is ignoring obvious facts and I am the correct one," so to speak. I thought it would be....contemplative...to consider the rationality of the discussion without the topic. I'm working on a much longer piece dealing with several serious discussion about the same. This was just for fun while I considered it. I love writing about two groups whos conflict seems perfectly rational from within but is very clearly asinine from without.

That said, I'm glad you liked it.

Thank you! I'm exactly the opposite. I enjoy dialogue but I'm having to work on being able to describe scenery, actions etc. In fact I posted another all dialogue piece last night. I was working on a very descriptive (imagery.....) part of a chapter and it just popped into my head.

Originally Posted by Flapjack

There is definitely an underlying metaphor here. Actually it's pretty simple. The hint is Pascal's wager. I used it twice in the form most people use in an argument: "what if your wrong?" I'll let you guess from there.

Eh? Pascal's wager? Have mercy on me, I'm only 13 years old. Does it have something to do with God then? I'm super duper confused now.

No problem. Glad to see someone your age interested in writing. It does havesomething to do with God. Basically you're looking at a discussion between anatheist and a fervent religious believer, but taken out of the context of aquestion of eternity. The point is twofold. Firstly, I wanted to showcasecharacters using only dialogue. Secondly, the story gives enough informationfor you to see that there are two different people with two differentperspectives. They cannot come to any agreement because their positions aretotally opposite and they have no reason to change.

(warning - religious discussion coming. All who might be offended avert youreyes)

As far as Pascal's wager, it is a common argument used by Christians and very likely other religions. Simplyput either there is a God or there isn't. If there isn't a God then it can't hurt if you serve God because your actions will have no negative consequences... If there is a God, then serving him would be the bestchoice because of the rewards for doing so. That said,the only choice is to serve God. You could liken it to flipping a coin where if you get heads nothing happens and if you get tails you win a million dollars. If you don't flip it however, it is possible you will go to hell. The obvious choice would seem to be to take the "wager" and flip the coin (or serve God).

This of course is an oversimplification. Pascal's wager is a very poorargument and any intelligent person, believer or not, doesn't use it. That saidthere is an important lesson to learn from it. Pascal's wager is what is knownas a bifurcation or a false dilemma. It can also be called a false dichotomy.That means that you have taken a choice that has several options and made itappear to have two. For example, on your sixteenth birthday your father comesto you and says, "Son. It's time to start preparing for the future. Youcan either be a doctor or a lawyer. You need to decide over the coming weeks sowe can get you into the right university." Now it is obvious you have moreoptions than being a doctor or lawyer. You could be a dentist, vet, fisherman,firefighter, pilot, author or you could move to Somalia and join a pirate ship.So in the example your father has created a false dilemma where it seems youroptions are more limited than they really are.

In the case of Pascal's wager, the argument doesn't account for the otheroptions. For example another religion which is contrary to Christianity has the"truth" and all those who are Christians will be punished post death.Also, perhaps there is a God but Christianity itself is incorrect and Goddoesn't concern himself with our actions. Both viable options in the example.This is the reason why Pascal's wager is called a logical fallacy. (Also, Ishould note that Pascal's wager is considered a poor argument because itimplies that believing in God has no ill effects. Obviously that is incorrect: i.e.war, terror attacks, fraud taking advantage of religious, family distress over difference of beliefs, etc.)

Anyway, Like I said it's good to see someone your age interested in writing.It is a very good idea to learn about logical fallacies like the false dilemma.They help you understand when someone is making an argument that isn't logical.Also, some writers like to use logical fallacies intentionally to point out a flawedargument for a reason. It's a cool tool to have.

I see. Thank you for explaining!

I think you did this really well - your dialogue is great - do you have any other work that I can read online? I'm new here and looking inspiration

Thank you! I am flattered. You can link to my blog below in my signature. That said there are tons of writers much better than I on this forum. The first thing that comes to mind is the furher02's blog at http://kanzlerstales.yolasite.com/. Welcome to writing forums!

Cheers I really liked Stacey Ardine La Beau I could visualise her perfectly from your description. More great dialogue. I'll have to go and check out the fuher02's blog now.

I like this Flapjack. In case you were unaware, my life is cake, so I'm bound to enjoy things about my life.

Every piece of cake must be loved tenderly. Every brow should be furrowed at its monetary value.

My life is cake.

Hi Flapjack, this piece is right up my street. I loved it.

However, I have two observations you might consider. Pascal (P) is trying to ‘sell’ his cupcake to the other bloke (OB). The problem is OB has already tasted it; therefore his opinion is entrenched and the conversion is doomed from line four.

If OB hadn’t tasted it and his refusal to do so was on the basis of his opinion on the prune and trout ingredients, P’s task of convincing OB would have possibilities of success; all he has to do is persuade OB to taste it.

This would also help with my second observation…an ending. If P managed to persuade OB to have a nibble, OB’s reaction would provide an ending.

Originally Posted by qwertyman

his ipinion is entrenched and the conversation is doomed....

Yes, well, that was really the point. I wrote this when I was in a bit of a foul mood.

I had OB already have tasted the cupcake because I wanted OB to come from a position where he had already obtained all the relevant knowledge. P, on the other hand, only has personal experience to go off of. I'm trying to show the difference between OB's analytical thinking and P's fallacies.

The point, really, is that there is no resolution. The last line, "I give up, your just delusional", was originally repeated and it is kind of meant to be both from them.