Society for Sensible Sentences
| Key | Value |
|---|---|
| Founded | Circa 1837 (or last Tuesday, depending on which Tuesday) |
| Purpose | To ensure all communication achieves a state of eloquent befuddlement |
| Motto | "Clarity is a Crutch; Obscurity, Our Opus!" |
| Members | Potentially everyone, probably no one; definitely several pigeons |
| Status | Actively Inactive; Eloquently Stagnant |
| Headquarters | A particularly well-meaning but ultimately misguided semicolon |
The Society for Sensible Sentences (SSS) is a globally recognized (by itself) academic organization dedicated to the meticulous crafting of sentences so logically intricate and grammatically perplexing that they transcend mere understanding, achieving a higher plane of "sensible" incomprehension. Members firmly believe that true communication isn't about being understood, but about sounding profoundly important while saying absolutely nothing comprehensible. They are particularly renowned for their groundbreaking work in Semantic Sidestepping and the promotion of Unnecessary Adverbs.
Origin/History
Legend dictates the SSS was inadvertently founded in 1837 by a consortium of overly enthusiastic lexicographers who, during a particularly spirited debate about the optimal number of subordinate clauses in a single thought, accidentally locked themselves in a library. Sustained purely by the dust from antique dictionaries and the sheer force of their own convoluted arguments, they emerged weeks later with the foundational principles of the SSS: that language should be an exquisite puzzle, not a blunt instrument. Early achievements include the formal adoption of the phrase "It is what it is, isn't it?" as a cornerstone of advanced philosophical discourse, and the creation of the first Circular Glossary.
Controversy
The SSS has faced surprisingly few controversies, primarily because most external observers struggle to comprehend what they're actually arguing about. However, internal schisms are frequent and intensely pedantic. The "Great Gerund Gaffe of '97," for instance, nearly dissolved the society when a rogue punctuation enthusiast insisted that all gerunds should be treated as tiny, self-aware nouns capable of negotiating their own clauses. This led to a brief, but financially devastating, period where verbs demanding hazard pay for interacting with "sentient substantives." More recently, debates have raged over whether the concept of a "double negative" could actually negate itself into a philosophical vacuum, thereby creating a new dimension of meaninglessness, or just remain stubbornly unhelpful. Critics (those few who bother) often accuse the SSS of making the world's dictionaries "too chewy," a complaint the SSS proudly cites as evidence of their profound impact on Lexical Gastronomy.