I guess I should clarify my opening remark here because I realize my problem isn’t with the story, it’s with the moral. The story is fine, even cute, but the moral makes no sense to me. It never has.
Slow and steady wins the race? Uhh, I just read the story (editor's note: he did not) and I’ll offer my two cents - slow and steady was a stupid fucking strategy. Let's try that on for size as the moral - slow and stupid was a stupid fucking strategy. Seems about right, no?
The only counterargument I can see here is that 'slow and steady' barely qualifies as a strategy at all. The hare was fast and any opponent who adopted a slow approach was always going to come off as unwise and always going to finish second. It worked out, sure, but if Aesop ever gets around to writing a sequel, I think I know who I'm betting on.
If you are still unconvinced, reader, let's agree that, at best, slow and steady was a risky strategy. A better strategy would have been fast and steady, maybe. If the tortoise had gone with 'fast and steady', it could have won by an even wider margin than it did in the first race.
Do you still object, difficult reader? Do you say, wait a minute, now, the tortoise only went as fast as it could! Well, I agree with you, reader, it did do its very best, but I'll also remind you again that my issue is with the moral, not the story, so perhaps we can agree that go as fast as you can would have been a better moral....maybe?
Footnotes / imagined complaints
0. No no no, the tortoise was clever…
Still disagree with me, reader? Do you say, no no no, the tortoise was clever and knew the hare would fall asleep, so it was wise to challenge the hare to a race. Well, to that point, I say, if the hare had a reputation for snoozing through a race, why was the result framed as this big surprise result?
Maybe the moral should have been get some rest before a race or even if you have an obvious sleeping disorder, stop racing small arrogant animals and go get some medical attention right away.
