Talk:Sarah

Ooh, inanimate objects thinking; check. Messed up chronology; check. Repetition of a term again and again for emphasis; check. Cynical look at interpersonal relationships; check. Yep, this is good modernist prose. Though I'd like to mention that it seems there's a contradiction between "It had been there for 6,000 Sarah’s" and "The stone had seen thousands of children, but only one Sarah". Maybe I understood it wrong. --Nonimportant 19:57, 28 November 2007 (UTC)