As a writer, I catalog all my experiences, naturally, and try to make sense of them for later use. But recently, I discovered something bizarre and inexplicable. Everything happens for a reason, of course, and the universe has an order to it.
So why does Hanes underwear come in a resealable bag?
Comments Off on Why?
Filed under Uncategorized
Hey, all, I have a new story up in the Autumn issue of Kaleidotrope: There Are Rules. Check it out, if you are so inclined (it is less spooky than the delightful cover art for the issue would imply)
Filed under General Writing Things
My word processor does not believe in contracting “it is”. My phone does not believe that “it” can ever take a possessive. I assume this is a manifestation of some kind of battle between Microsoft and Google, but it would be nice if they’d loosen up and take less absolutist stances, vis-a-vis autocorrect. Oh, and MS Word? “And then” is worse than “and” or “then” 99.99% of the time. Cut it out.
Comments Off on An Observation
Filed under Grammar Gripery
I don’t like talking about the movie adaptation of League of Extraordinary Gentlemen more than absolutely necessary, since one can say without exaggeration that it is one of the worst things to ever befall humanity. If nothing else, it holds the record for distance between quality of source material and quality of adaptation. But now there’s talk of a new movie version, and I’m (very) cautiously optimistic, if only because if it is relatively successful it might bump the current hideous abomination from occasionally taking up valuable TV time on Saturday afternoons, like the way the new Fantastic Four movie will … okay, bad example. Okay, like how the more recent Judge Dredd movie bumped that horrible Sylvester Stallone thing where he refused to wear the helmet, or the various more recent Batman movies bumped the various older Batman movies.
But here’s the thing. Everyone is very excited about the quote from John Davis, producer of said movie, where he says it’s going to be more “female-centric”. This has, of course, made the sort of people who shriek about Ghostbusters remakes flip out, because argle-bargle PC blah blah, and other people to get all excited about John Davis’s creativity and bravery. All these people are jerks, because they are either opining about something they don’t know about, or like the author of that very article I linked to, seem to have not absorbed anything of what they read. Or what John Davis said.
Because Davis’s whole point is that being more faithful to the source material, it will end up being more female-centric. This is because unlike the movie, which had Alan Quatermain leading the group because someone got Sean Connery to play him (and Sean fucking Connery can’t play a semi-decrepit opium addict who needs help to find his way back to being useful, oh no), in the graphic novel, Mina Harker was the one who recruited the team of sociopaths and held them together (for a while). Of course in the movie, Mina had to be changed into a generic leather-clad spinny killbot ™ who, as I recall, had no lines. She got off easy compared to the treatment of Mr Hyde, but let’s not get into that.
See? Right there in the center
Anyway, can we just all agree that no one who hasn’t read the Alan Moore graphic novel is allowed to talk about this subject anymore? Great, thanks.
Comments Off on Argh
Filed under General Writing Things
I used to be quite the cyclist back in the day, racing almost every weekend in the summer. Not so much these days, but I did ride a race not long ago for old time’s sake. It happens to be a race well known for treating riders well, by feeding them muffins and such after the race, as well as the traditional water and bananas. They also hand out a goody bag to all the riders, with little gifts that vary from year to year. This year, the bag contained this:
That’s right – a pint glass, a beer cozy, and a “Michelob Ultra” water bottle. Message received, race organizers. I will commence unwinding from the race.
Filed under Uncategorized
I’ve been remiss in posting lately, which is particularly troubling because I missed talking about this new book from Carrie Patel back when I could lord my insider status in the writing biz as someone who had already read it, like I did with her last book.
Of course, by now, ya’ll have probably already read it. If not, what are you waiting for?
Comments Off on Another Book, Again!
Filed under The Writing Biz
This here not only perfectly captures my feelings on linguistics, but gymnastics as well!
Comments Off on Pragmatism
Filed under Grammar Gripery
I was listening to the news the other day, and heard someone say that they were “literally flabbergasted” at something. I don’t recall what had caused the flabbergastation, or anything in particular about the news story, but it got me thinking. Is there any other way to be flabbergasted?
I mean, I’m not here to rehash the old “literal versus figurative” thing, though I tend to abandon my normal descriptivist leanings and come across all prescriptivist about that particular topic. Obviously, it doesn’t make sense to tack “literally” onto “flabbergasted” if one is using literally properly. Flabbergasting doesn’t really have a concrete sense, so there’s no need to explain to everyone that you aren’t, in this particular case, talking about being figuratively flabbergasted (what would figuratively flabbergasted look like?).
But see here, even if we allow improper use of literally as a generic intensifier, it doesn’t make much sense here. “Flabbergasted” is a pretty damn intense word already. Intensifying it is kind of gilding the lily, isn’t it? It’s sort of the ne plus ultra of surprise already, folks. Leave it alone.
Comments Off on Literally Flabbergasted
Filed under Grammar Gripery
So there’s a new app out there called “Cleanreader” for people who don’t like writing all that much, by expurgating naughty words (that is to say words that Jared and Kirsten Maughan don’t approve of). Some folks don’t like their writing being altered by this thing, but it is legal. The thing is, back when Thomas Bowlder made Shakespeare safe to read back in the day, he didn’t just barge in and replace one word at a time (despite the fact that his name later came to be synonymous with doing that). Single word replacement just results in too many comical errors, as one finds in the recent biography of Groin Cheney.
The other problem, of course, is that folks like the Maughans, who don’t have much respect for language, aren’t really equipped to come up with good replacements for naughty words – wouldn’t be even if they could come up with a more intelligent replacement method. I mean, check out the list of words and their replacements, here. There seems to be some confusion about what a “bottom” is, for one thing. And more to the point, you can’t replace the tapestry of various words for that piece of the anatomy, each with their own particular flavor, with one word.
But I’m here to help! It so happens that throughout the ages, we humans have come up with all sorts of wonderful words for intimate anatomy, so there’s no need to be so stingy. Just check out Johnathan Green’s various lists – he’s done all the legwork. And wouldn’t you rather read prose peppered with words like “ring-dang-doo” and “Captain Standish” than see nothing but bottoms and groins everywhere?
Filed under General Writing Things
I was recently directed to a certain author’s blog, who, possibly jumping off from Heinlein’s third rule of writing, tells aspiring writers never to revise their work (or possibly even re-read anything they’ve written). Rather, he says just keep cranking out the prose and sending it out and/or publishing it, then moving on to the next thing.
Personally, the very idea of doing that horrifies me, since when I look at some of the old stuff I’ve written I can only be grateful no one else had a chance to see it until I had a chance to make it better, and figure out how I actually want the plot to function. But I understand that every writer is different, and no doubt many are slow, careful types who get things down pretty much the way they like the first time. But I can’t help but wonder if functioning this way might result in some books like the one in the old Bob and Ray skit:
Comments Off on Revisions
Filed under The Writing Biz
