# Analogies, important to writing kind of like the iron to my hemoglobin



## Xipoid (Apr 2, 2009)

Analogies, o' sweet analogies. They are such wonderful little things often comparing two things in an expressive, creative way much how an artist strokes his brush into a world of fantasy.

But sometimes, they are terrible, out of place, and outright bewildering. This thread is to celebrate all those unwittingly (or even wittingly) obtuse analogies that completely destroy flow... like these. Old yes, but that is not the point.


Here we celebrate writing and fun by purposefully creating terrible and terribly humorous analogies (the less esoteric the better). Use your wit, I'm sure you can come up with something no writer would ever want their name upon.


Edit:
Oh yes, and discussing the use of analogies as well. Perhaps something cut and dry or a little over the top?


----------



## Shouden (Apr 2, 2009)

I find analogies are the best ways to describe things. Analogies and metaphors. Gives you a greater sense of what's exactly going on.


----------



## Chronic (Apr 2, 2009)

I looked upon this thread and my brain shut down like a power plant during lunch break.


----------



## Yorokonde2 (Apr 3, 2009)

My creativity flows like the town fountain that time the pipes burst and it was clogged with sewage.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Apr 3, 2009)

Yeah... analogies are important.  They're pretty much the dill in the pickle: without them, a piece of writing is just a soggy cucumber.  And it's not just limited to fiction, of course.  Fiction is one vehicle, like a sports car, so your analogies in fiction tend to come in the form of similes and metaphors, those chrome rims and jeweled cup holders and bling bling that really pimp out the ride.  Whereas with nonfiction, which is more of a tank, you'd want your analogies to be less decoration and more useful.  So instead of bling, you'd put on a more accurate gun sight, or maybe new treads, reinforced steel armoring: anything that gets the point across better.
Of course, if you use these tools incorrectly, you'll actually end up doing more damage than good.  The wrong simile can turn the Cabbage Patch into the Garbage Pail.  You don't just want to slather on the bacon grease, after all; any kind of oil has got to be used delicately, else whatever meal you're cooking will end up tasting like a burnt funnel cake.  
And it has to make sense, too.  You can't just mix paper with plastic and expect it to turn out well.  Analogies with wishy-washy logic just lead the reader into a mirror-maze: he can find his way out, but it's gonna' be confusing, and he might end up with a different perspective than you wanted him to.
Anyway, that's my take on the matter.  I think you get the picture.


----------



## Xipoid (Apr 4, 2009)

M. Le Renard said:


> Yeah... analogies are important.  They're pretty much the dill in the pickle: without them, a piece of writing is just a soggy cucumber.  And it's not just limited to fiction, of course.  Fiction is one vehicle, like a sports car, so your analogies in fiction tend to come in the form of similes and metaphors, those chrome rims and jeweled cup holders and bling bling that really pimp out the ride.  Whereas with nonfiction, which is more of a tank, you'd want your analogies to be less decoration and more useful.  So instead of bling, you'd put on a more accurate gun sight, or maybe new treads, reinforced steel armoring: anything that gets the point across better.
> Of course, if you use these tools incorrectly, you'll actually end up doing more damage than good.  The wrong simile can turn the Cabbage Patch into the Garbage Pail.  You don't just want to slather on the bacon grease, after all; any kind of oil has got to be used delicately, else whatever meal you're cooking will end up tasting like a burnt funnel cake.
> And it has to make sense, too.  You can't just mix paper with plastic and expect it to turn out well.  Analogies with wishy-washy logic just lead the reader into a mirror-maze: he can find his way out, but it's gonna' be confusing, and he might end up with a different perspective than you wanted him to.
> Anyway, that's my take on the matter.  I think you get the picture.




You should try harder. That made too much sense, though I do agree with you.


----------



## Shino (Apr 4, 2009)

*Gets back up off the floor.*

Wow, that was the first time I've ROFLed in a while. *Cringes at the term.* Thanks for the link.

Umm... let's see...

My mind raced like a car stuck in neutral.

Hmm, I don't think I'm very good at this.

*Mind begins to wander.* *I get up and chase after it.*


----------



## Xipoid (Apr 4, 2009)

Oddly, it takes a degree of effort to truly create something glaringly bad. I'm having trouble with anything myself.


----------



## Shino (Apr 4, 2009)

Xipoid said:


> Oddly, it takes a degree of effort to truly create something glaringly bad.


 
Obviously, you've never been to my high school.

Everyone there wrote at a fourth-grade level, meanwhile I would red-pen my _teacher's_ assignments. She _loved_ that.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Apr 4, 2009)

It's supposed to make no sense?  But that's too easy.
--Analogies are like water.  They shouldn't freeze, or else they turn in to ice.--
See?  That made no sense, and it wasn't hard to come up with because I didn't think about it.  I thought we were just supposed to use analogies that give something of a stupid and slightly inappropriate image for comparison.


----------

