I choose to opt out of this assignment, because (aside from the fact that I have always hated writing anything besides articles and analytical essays) I do not believe that Flarfing has any intrinsic literary value. I do admire the masterful way which Kasey and Gary Sullivan used Flarfing to expose the fraud behind Poetry.com’s contest. The genre of Flarfing, and uncreative writing in general, is useful as an educational tool in discussing what sort of texts have literary value. Yet each singular text lacks literary value. There is nothing to be gained by studying one work of uncreative writing that could not be gained by studying any other work of uncreative writing.
The democratization of language through internet mediums such as AIM, texting, and Twitter has led to a new paradigm of language, in which the reader/listener is expected to understand what is communicated, rather than expecting the author/speaker to communicate effectively. This promotes a lack of restraint and self-reflection. Additionally this new paradigm encourages appropriation as opposed to production, which retards innovation and original thinking. I believe uncreative writing glorifies this new paradigm, which in my opinion accompanies a decline in language and culture, to which I do not wish to contribute.