Therefore, since brevity is the soul of wit, And tediousness the limbs and outward flourishes, I will be brief.

So WIT is this person, right – a very clever person – and his soul is brevity. His essence is succinct pithy direct hits. At his best, his most true, he is brief. His arms and legs are tediousness – as are the outward flourishes – which raises some questions for me about this WIT person.
One: Are his outward flourishes his gestures? And are gestures tedious? What does a tedious flourish look like?
Two: His limbs are tedious? To whom? Is it tedious for him to have a body, to lift his legs to walk, or raise his arms to lift his child? Or tedious to watch him plod along or repeat that nervous tic?
Three: It sounds like this wit person might have some difficulties. What do those look like?
Or else, despite how good this language sounds, this sentence may not really make much sense.
It’s still funny though. It’s funny for a guy who’s already talked way too much to wax poetic about the value of brevity, before declaring, with too many words, that he will be brief.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.