"Now here's crap"

Here's a selection from my cut-up:

Color information ("parvocellular RGCs") handedly redefined funny as the 007 wasn't bad despite in nonglaucomatous optic neuropaty is usua NBC's hit show the office canh in the all-important and can be tested with Ishihara or Hard-kily, smitten chicks will soon be de Besseges and was approximately 8% of male patients (and less the 28-year old actor is complett ahead of the decisive have congenital X-linked dyschromatopsia, ief Interviews with Hideous Men, the 2007 Tour when condition is not new and patients are usually we'll star opposite heavyweight Cristian Moreni failed in such cases the color deficit should be identifihich he plays--now here's crap.

The main pieces of writing I cut-up included an article from Cosmo about John Krasinski (better known as "Jim" from The Office), an article from VeloNews (a cycling magazine) about an up-and-coming cycling star from Belgium, and a scientific article the P.I. from my lab wrote entitled "Neuroprotection for Glaucoma." As a result of these extremely varying topics, my cut-up doesn't make much sense at all (althought this paragraph I used as an excerpt is the most intelligible). I really enjoyed finding a few humorous sentences when these all combined, because alone, most of these articles aren't very funny--the "now here's crap" came from two completely different sources and that's just how they happened to line up.

Overall, I didn't find the cut-up a very effective method for the kind of writing I would ever be doing. I can see that if you're a creative or fiction writer and need a new idea or word or even just a new way of thinking, how cut-ups would be an incredibly helpful and fast method of inspiration, but otherwise, I think it mostly just produces a lot of gibberish. Another positive note for cut-ups: ripping paper and pretending like you're making a collage in elementary school again is a VERY good stress relief :)