But it's not speculative at all. There are only like three sentences of any substance in the whole thing. A parrot who is more an idea than a character speaks to the reader claiming that a parrot understanding shapes and colors means that parrots are sapient, and humans not recognizing that means we won't recognize sapient alien life, P.S. humans are killing all the parrots. There is no story. The essay being from the perspective of a parrot instead of a person talking about parrots has no consequences and doesn't change the work at all. The whole thing is incredibly facile.
We Puerto Rican parrots have our own myths. They’re simpler than human mythology, but I think humans would take pleasure from them. Alas, our myths are being lost as my species dies out.
That's the only fictive part of the entire work.
It's just so lazy to change the premise of something without that change having any meaningful impact. What makes the statement by the parrot different from if it were from a human? Nothing whatsoever, and that's why this is a bad "story".
