Aardvark

Aardvark

Hello. Welcome. Hellcome.

Oh boy. I’m sorry; that went to a bad place quickly. But I’m going to keep going. I can’t keep filling the waste bin with blog false starts. It’s not my place to put that on my garbage man. And besides that, all those half-blogs are just going to pile up in the landfill. These things take centuries to break down.

You are reading the inaugural post of Rate Every Animal, the blog where I rate every animal.

Now I know what you’re thinking. 1) “How is this different from every other animal-review site?” and 2) “Is he psychic?” The answers to these questions are “no” and “a personal touch” – not necessarily in that order.

I hope to get deeper beyond the usual criteria into my own emotional reactions and free associations with each animal I cover. This does not mean that I will skimp on sharing my deep knowledge of the facts about them. For instance, did you know that the aardvark has control over four of the five elements? Can you guess which is the odd element out? (Hint: It’s not wind, earth, fire or love!)

That is a sampling of the kind of insight I will provide in my efforts to review every animal, but it is also a segue into my first subject: The aardvark.

The aardvark is not a noble animal. This is key to understanding it.

I’m not going to shy away from the elephant in the room.* The aardvark is famous for being the alphabetically first animal. I like to think you are secure enough in yourself to admit that this fact is the first thing that came to mind when you read the word “aardvark.” The aardvark named itself so in a blatant act of self-aggrandizement and overcompensation, well aware that were it not for this name, it would be no better regarded than the lowly tapir.

Disgusting.

I cracked open my American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language to measure the success of the aardvark’s cheat.** Items that appear before “aardvark” (ignoring letters, prefixes, and acronyms) include Aachen, Aalborg and Aar. I think we can agree that Charlemagne, Denmark and the Swiss are all guilty of “the aardvark’s cheat.”

Special powers

The aardvark possesses a number of powers, one of which I alluded to earlier: It holds command over all the elements except for water. It also boasts powerful claws, which it uses to break into termite homes and eat their residents. The aardvark’s teeth never stop growing, which is why any time an aardvark grave is exhumed, all that remains is a giant pile of gnarled teeth, like a gruesome Cheshire smile.

Weaknesses

Its inability to command water.

Number of legs

Four.

Do I own a Beanie Baby of it?

I do not. In fact, I don’t believe the aardvark was featured in any of the first generation.

What if it fought a bear?

Due to the aardvark’s command of fire and trickster nature, it is my finding that a bear would be defeated by an aardvark in a street fight, but not in any professional settings.

Is it noble?

No.

Final rating

Fitting with the aardvark’s shortcut-taking nature, termites are a coward’s prey, but it is good that someone is eating them, as I enjoy a number of items made in part or wholly of wood. I also respect its capacity for love, which perhaps someday will open up the possibility of redemption. As it stands, however, the aardvark is a scoundrel.

 

3.5/10

 

 

*Metaphorical. It is an aardvark.

**I am trying to get this phrase to catch on like “Seward’s folly” did.

Tagged , , , , , , ,

6 thoughts on “Aardvark

  1. Charlene says:

    Only the first post and I’m stoked. Is this going to go in alphabetical order?

  2. […] aardvark was an obvious choice for the first post of my animal-review site. Some would say “too […]

  3. […] gave the pigeon and dove their friendly dispositions. Today we know humorism to be helpful only to those whose bile actually does manifest in elemental forces. It’s not the missing gall that affects the Columbidae family’s countenance; it’s […]

  4. Phoebe Phillip says:

    For some time now, I have been internally campaigning for a redistribution of names among the ant-eating mammal community. Namely, the Anteater and the Aardvark. My argument is simple: Aardvarks: GREAT name, mediocre looking animal. Anteaters: Generic name, awesome, crazyweirdcool looking animal! Well, so why shouldn’t they be rechristened more appropriately?

    LET AARDVARKS BE ANTEATERS, AND ANTEATERS BE AARDVARKS!! (allow chant to ring out in the night sky a bit, then fade out, heroically).

    If you were to review the Anteater, with perhaps even a side by side overview of the Aardvark….?) you could judge for yourself. We would certainly be thrilled to have so venerable and august an organization as rateeveryanimal in our corner…

    ~Thank you for your consideration~

Comments are closed.