In one of those weird quirks of life, I have ended up following the blogs of several authors whose books I actually haven't read. However which way I stumbled upon those blogs, reading them has definitely made me want to read their books as well. But my reading pile (as has been previously established) is not small, and rarely stops growing.
One of those authors that I have been following is N.K. Jemisin. I discovered her when she filled in as a guest blogger for John Scalzi while he was out on a tour (I think) last year. I find her blog absolutely fascinating, whether it be about her writing process, her actual works, her commenting policy for the site, or her views on gender and racial equality. Everything she writes is extremely well written, and I rarely find myself disagreeing with what she has to say. Even when I do, the way she expresses herself allows me to respect her opinions nonetheless. Often what she writes challenges me to think about my own writing and actions. I'd say that makes her blog pretty worthwhile reading.
Her voice is a unique one in the world of fantasy, though as she points out, it shouldn't be. She has written many short stories, which I would like to check out at some point, but her primary project to date is The Inheritance Trilogy (not to be confused with Christopher Paolini's Inheritance Cycle--think Eragon--which was initially supposed to be a trilogy but ended up expanding to four books, thus becoming a "cycle" rather than "trilogy").
Earlier this year my husband surprised me with the first two books in the trilogy, The Hundred Thousand Kingdoms, and The Broken Kingdoms (the third book, The Kingdom of Gods, is due out next month). I was finally able to dive into this series recently, and I found myself absolutely devouring the two books. They are fantastic! Much like Jemisin herself, her work is unique and very eloquent.
I think my favorite thing about the books is that each one is its own story, with its own characters. Book two is set some time after the end of book one, and deals with the ramifications of all that passed in The Hundred Thousand Kingdoms. While some characters from the first book appear in The Broken Kingdoms, they only appear when they are integral to the story, and they are supporting cast rather than main characters. The two books are set in the same city, but the settings could not feel more different. Yet there is a sense of familiarity there still that does tie them both together and allows the reader to revel in the continuity of story, even with all of the differences. It is wonderful, and I delighted in it. I am definitely looking forward to seeing how the third book continues this style.
I think for fans of fantasy this trilogy will be a must read. Even more so for readers who crave strong female characters--which are so sorely lacking in other forms of entertainment these days. Even better, if you are a fan of fantasy looking to convert a friend or loved one to the genre, this might be a great gateway series. It is fast-paced and so a quick read, and will only clock in at three books when done (Jemisin is already working on her next series which sounds equally intriguing). The setting, while not our "modern" world, is urban, and while still deliciously fantastic it is also amazingly familiar, something that I think will make this breed of fantasy more accessible to newcomers.
I don't want to give away too much of the story itself, because I would hate to spoil the joy of uncovering it on your own. But I can tell you that The Inheritance Trilogy is about gods. Actual living gods and their interactions with the mortals they created in the world they also created. It is also about family, in many different senses of the word. Another theme that runs through is facing one's past and confronting those things we thought we had left behind. Of course there is love in there as well--all kinds of love--and extremely well written. Even as these fantastic events, these impossible events, unfold before the reader's eyes, they are wholly believable.
So, for those of you looking for something interesting and entertaining and good to read? I cannot recommend N.K. Jemisin more highly.
Showing posts with label John Scalzi. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Scalzi. Show all posts
Thursday, September 15, 2011
Friday, September 2, 2011
Why I Will Never Be A Critic
Writer John Scalzi wrote an interesting post this week about the varying purposes of criticism (of film, television, games, books, etc.) and how to make sure your criticism is taken seriously (or when to know to ignore it if you are the one under review).
Go ahead, take a few minutes to read it, it's very well written and definitely worth a look. I'll wait.
The whole thing got me thinking once more on a topic that crosses my mind from time to time, and that is that I could probably never be a professional critic, or reviewer even. Why? Because it seems to me that anything I feel is worth writing about is something that I love. You tend to be more forgiving of flaws in that which you love, and willing to give the benefit of the doubt more often than not. Heck, I don't even tend to look at reviews of things that I know I don't actually like (or strongly suspect I won't).*
If I love a show, for example, I will not continue to read reviews by a writer who clearly cannot stand that show and is just enjoying tearing it apart. I can acknowledge, on an academic level, that something I love is stupid and terrible and not very well made. But I will still love it nonetheless. I have no need to experience another's hate for that thing. Now, a well thought out, critical assessment pointing out the flaws objectively, that I can deal with, because I understand that what I enjoy is not necessarily what anyone else enjoys. But plain old vitriol? No, thank you.
I tend to seek out those things that I think I will enjoy, and very rarely am I disappointed that way. (When I am disappointed, the blows always seem to hit pretty hard, however.) If a new show or a film or a book doesn't appeal to me, I usually just don't give it any thought, other than, perhaps, to be annoyed when I have to hear all about it on Facebook the next day. Occasionally I will step out of my comfort zone and give something a try even if I think it looks stupid or just doesn't appeal to me (usually because either someone I trust thinks that I will enjoy it or because there is an actor/writer involved that I generally enjoy). Often, when I do this, I am pleasantly surprised by what I find. I discovered two of my favorite television shows this way--Human Target and Leverage. I had no intention of watching either until I learned of particular bits of casting, and I gave them a try. From this, I know that there is probably a lot out there that I think is stupid but might actually enjoy if I gave it a try.**
But there is just so much out there to read, or to see, or to watch, or to play, or what have you. I can't partake of it all. So I stick with what I am pretty sure I know I will like, and I am content in this way. I trust the universe to play out in a manner such that if there is something I need to experience, I will, eventually. I have learned to walk away when something I love becomes unrecognizable and I no longer enjoy it. That doesn't mean that others who once loved it have stopped as well, though. I may not understand why they would choose continue loving that thing, but I don't need to. They simply do.
We are not all the same. These days, there is something out there for everyone. You might not like what I like, and vice versa. I try to remind myself of this, and not to judge those who like something I consider unworthy.*** To bring it back to Scalzi's post, the bit where he talks about the difference between "I don't like that/I don't understand why you like that" and "Only idiots like that/What's wrong with you, if you like that" really struck a nerve with me. Like I said, I try not to judge others who don't see these things in the same way that I do, but I am not sure I would be able to convey that correctly in writing a review or critique. Because I have found that when I do write about these shows or books or movies, all I want to do is sing their praises. I don't want to talk about the things I didn't like, because for me they are not worth mentioning, unless they ruined the whole thing, and then I just want to talk about that thing at all. There's not much point to that, in my mind. If you've been reading my Stargate rewatch posts, or any of the other reviews on this site (which I try to call "recommendations" rather than reviews, because really, that's what they are), then you've probably noticed they are all mostly lovefests. Sure, there might be things I gripe about here and there, but that is because I enjoy griping about it, and it comes from a place of love.
For me, being a critic would mean setting aside that part of my personality that likes to look at the bright side. I am not a blind fool. I know there is unpleasantness in life, and even in myself at times, but when it comes along I deal with it as best as I can, and try not to burden others with it if at all possible.
Then I find something happy to dwell on instead.
*The exception to this are Flick Filosopher's reviews. I can admit that I sometimes look forward to her reviews of things I suspect I will not like or are stupid, because generally she sees them the same way, and manages to convey as such in a witty and amusing manner.
**Except for reality shows. I maintain that they are inherently stupid and I cannot get behind them.
***This is really hard when it comes to reality shows. I cannot understand how anyone actually enjoys them and I am not sure I want to, because I fear it would make me weep for humanity. Or myself. It disturbs me that I am that much different from, apparently, the rest of the world.
Go ahead, take a few minutes to read it, it's very well written and definitely worth a look. I'll wait.
The whole thing got me thinking once more on a topic that crosses my mind from time to time, and that is that I could probably never be a professional critic, or reviewer even. Why? Because it seems to me that anything I feel is worth writing about is something that I love. You tend to be more forgiving of flaws in that which you love, and willing to give the benefit of the doubt more often than not. Heck, I don't even tend to look at reviews of things that I know I don't actually like (or strongly suspect I won't).*
If I love a show, for example, I will not continue to read reviews by a writer who clearly cannot stand that show and is just enjoying tearing it apart. I can acknowledge, on an academic level, that something I love is stupid and terrible and not very well made. But I will still love it nonetheless. I have no need to experience another's hate for that thing. Now, a well thought out, critical assessment pointing out the flaws objectively, that I can deal with, because I understand that what I enjoy is not necessarily what anyone else enjoys. But plain old vitriol? No, thank you.
I tend to seek out those things that I think I will enjoy, and very rarely am I disappointed that way. (When I am disappointed, the blows always seem to hit pretty hard, however.) If a new show or a film or a book doesn't appeal to me, I usually just don't give it any thought, other than, perhaps, to be annoyed when I have to hear all about it on Facebook the next day. Occasionally I will step out of my comfort zone and give something a try even if I think it looks stupid or just doesn't appeal to me (usually because either someone I trust thinks that I will enjoy it or because there is an actor/writer involved that I generally enjoy). Often, when I do this, I am pleasantly surprised by what I find. I discovered two of my favorite television shows this way--Human Target and Leverage. I had no intention of watching either until I learned of particular bits of casting, and I gave them a try. From this, I know that there is probably a lot out there that I think is stupid but might actually enjoy if I gave it a try.**
But there is just so much out there to read, or to see, or to watch, or to play, or what have you. I can't partake of it all. So I stick with what I am pretty sure I know I will like, and I am content in this way. I trust the universe to play out in a manner such that if there is something I need to experience, I will, eventually. I have learned to walk away when something I love becomes unrecognizable and I no longer enjoy it. That doesn't mean that others who once loved it have stopped as well, though. I may not understand why they would choose continue loving that thing, but I don't need to. They simply do.
We are not all the same. These days, there is something out there for everyone. You might not like what I like, and vice versa. I try to remind myself of this, and not to judge those who like something I consider unworthy.*** To bring it back to Scalzi's post, the bit where he talks about the difference between "I don't like that/I don't understand why you like that" and "Only idiots like that/What's wrong with you, if you like that" really struck a nerve with me. Like I said, I try not to judge others who don't see these things in the same way that I do, but I am not sure I would be able to convey that correctly in writing a review or critique. Because I have found that when I do write about these shows or books or movies, all I want to do is sing their praises. I don't want to talk about the things I didn't like, because for me they are not worth mentioning, unless they ruined the whole thing, and then I just want to talk about that thing at all. There's not much point to that, in my mind. If you've been reading my Stargate rewatch posts, or any of the other reviews on this site (which I try to call "recommendations" rather than reviews, because really, that's what they are), then you've probably noticed they are all mostly lovefests. Sure, there might be things I gripe about here and there, but that is because I enjoy griping about it, and it comes from a place of love.
For me, being a critic would mean setting aside that part of my personality that likes to look at the bright side. I am not a blind fool. I know there is unpleasantness in life, and even in myself at times, but when it comes along I deal with it as best as I can, and try not to burden others with it if at all possible.
Then I find something happy to dwell on instead.
*The exception to this are Flick Filosopher's reviews. I can admit that I sometimes look forward to her reviews of things I suspect I will not like or are stupid, because generally she sees them the same way, and manages to convey as such in a witty and amusing manner.
**Except for reality shows. I maintain that they are inherently stupid and I cannot get behind them.
***This is really hard when it comes to reality shows. I cannot understand how anyone actually enjoys them and I am not sure I want to, because I fear it would make me weep for humanity. Or myself. It disturbs me that I am that much different from, apparently, the rest of the world.
Friday, February 25, 2011
Props to Scalzi
This week it was announced that the book Old Man's War by John Scalzi has been optioned for a movie. Yay for Scalzi!
What I love even more than the news that an awesome sci-fi book has been optioned to be made into a movie is the very upfront and realistic way in which Scalzi is discussing the news.
He is very calmly reminding his readers that the movie, while he has high hopes for it to be awesome, will most definitely not be the book. This is because in order for the story to make the move from printed page to silver screen, changes will have to be made. That is why when a book is made into a movie it is called an adaptation. Scalzi very calmly reminds his enthusiastic fans that even if the movie based on the book somehow goes wonky and is royally screwed up, it will in no way, shape, or form harm the original book, which already exists as it is and isn't going anywhere.
I give Scalzi two big thumbs way, way up for this.
So often when a group's favorite book gets translated into a movie, a big chunk of the audience will waste time and effort nitpicking all of the differences between the two, often lessening their enjoyment of the movie greatly, if not completely. I can admit I have been guilty of this myself a time or two, though I try really hard to judge a movie adaptation on how well the story is portrayed in this new medium, rather than the little details. Sure it is fabulous when the movie-makers get the little details just right, but let's face facts. Everyone who reads a book pictures the characters and events described within in their own unique way. When a screen-writer, director, and producer adapt a book to a movie, they are only showing us their unique vision of the author's text. It may not be the same as ours, but that doesn't mean it is automatically bad.
Sometimes authors don't help the cause by publicly lambasting the resulting movie. I would think it is safe to argue that in those cases, the author was usually shut out of the creative process while the movie was being made. When the author doesn't decry the movie we see on our screens, that probably means that they were at least engaged by the screen-writer/producer/director's interpretation of their story, even if it isn't necessarily what the base audience was expecting. Sometimes that can lead to some very interesting results.
For example, Douglas Adams' Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Did you know it was not originally a book, but in fact first appeared as a radio play aired by the BBC? Yup. I am lucky enough to have copies of that original series, and I can tell you it is very, very different from the book of the same name that Adams subsequently published. I love them both though. The spirit of the story and of the main characters was very much the same in both versions, to be true. Some of the events were slightly different, sure, but that was because Adams really got what I am trying to say here. Different mediums lend themselves to different stories. Sometimes you can do things in one that aren't feasible in the other. The more recent movie of the same name was also very different from the book and the radio series, but I still love it. Adams worked with the movie's creators until his death, and they were dedicated to making sure the finished product was something he would have approved of. Knowing that, and keeping in mind the fact that Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy has a track record as a fluid story, flowing from medium to medium and shaping itself to fill each new cup specifically, allowed me to keep a more open mind than at any other movie based on a book I have ever seen.
It's so easy to get upset when your favorite part of a book gets left out of the movie, or worse, included but changed in a way that you don't care for. But movie-makers aren't going to stop adapting books to film any time soon. To be honest with you, I'd rather they do that than make another Saw film, or another remake of a movie that only came out ten years ago. So I am going to do my best going forward to keep Scalzi's words in mind whenever I go to see a movie adapted from a book that I love. I urge you to do the same.
Besides, there's always the chance that the next film will get it just right, and that's worth the risk of a shaky adaptation in my books.
Happy weekend folks, and don't forget to check out today's new Gronk, all about the perils of board games!
What I love even more than the news that an awesome sci-fi book has been optioned to be made into a movie is the very upfront and realistic way in which Scalzi is discussing the news.
He is very calmly reminding his readers that the movie, while he has high hopes for it to be awesome, will most definitely not be the book. This is because in order for the story to make the move from printed page to silver screen, changes will have to be made. That is why when a book is made into a movie it is called an adaptation. Scalzi very calmly reminds his enthusiastic fans that even if the movie based on the book somehow goes wonky and is royally screwed up, it will in no way, shape, or form harm the original book, which already exists as it is and isn't going anywhere.
I give Scalzi two big thumbs way, way up for this.
So often when a group's favorite book gets translated into a movie, a big chunk of the audience will waste time and effort nitpicking all of the differences between the two, often lessening their enjoyment of the movie greatly, if not completely. I can admit I have been guilty of this myself a time or two, though I try really hard to judge a movie adaptation on how well the story is portrayed in this new medium, rather than the little details. Sure it is fabulous when the movie-makers get the little details just right, but let's face facts. Everyone who reads a book pictures the characters and events described within in their own unique way. When a screen-writer, director, and producer adapt a book to a movie, they are only showing us their unique vision of the author's text. It may not be the same as ours, but that doesn't mean it is automatically bad.
Sometimes authors don't help the cause by publicly lambasting the resulting movie. I would think it is safe to argue that in those cases, the author was usually shut out of the creative process while the movie was being made. When the author doesn't decry the movie we see on our screens, that probably means that they were at least engaged by the screen-writer/producer/director's interpretation of their story, even if it isn't necessarily what the base audience was expecting. Sometimes that can lead to some very interesting results.
For example, Douglas Adams' Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Did you know it was not originally a book, but in fact first appeared as a radio play aired by the BBC? Yup. I am lucky enough to have copies of that original series, and I can tell you it is very, very different from the book of the same name that Adams subsequently published. I love them both though. The spirit of the story and of the main characters was very much the same in both versions, to be true. Some of the events were slightly different, sure, but that was because Adams really got what I am trying to say here. Different mediums lend themselves to different stories. Sometimes you can do things in one that aren't feasible in the other. The more recent movie of the same name was also very different from the book and the radio series, but I still love it. Adams worked with the movie's creators until his death, and they were dedicated to making sure the finished product was something he would have approved of. Knowing that, and keeping in mind the fact that Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy has a track record as a fluid story, flowing from medium to medium and shaping itself to fill each new cup specifically, allowed me to keep a more open mind than at any other movie based on a book I have ever seen.
It's so easy to get upset when your favorite part of a book gets left out of the movie, or worse, included but changed in a way that you don't care for. But movie-makers aren't going to stop adapting books to film any time soon. To be honest with you, I'd rather they do that than make another Saw film, or another remake of a movie that only came out ten years ago. So I am going to do my best going forward to keep Scalzi's words in mind whenever I go to see a movie adapted from a book that I love. I urge you to do the same.
Besides, there's always the chance that the next film will get it just right, and that's worth the risk of a shaky adaptation in my books.
Happy weekend folks, and don't forget to check out today's new Gronk, all about the perils of board games!
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Maybe I LIKE Doing It Wrong
I love reading John Scalzi, I really do. Ever since I stumbled across his blog due to his role as a consultant for Stargate Universe, I have to admit I have enjoyed it immensely. He actually talks very little about SGU in his blog (even more so now that SGU has been canceled), but that makes it no less interesting. I very much enjoy his writing style, and though I do not always agree with the opinions he expresses on his blog, he usually makes his point in a way so as to not be even remotely offensive to me. Rather, I can nod and say, "alright, I see your point. I don't necessarily agree with you, but I respect your opinion."
But an entry on his blog a little while back has been rattling around in my brain ever since I read it, and the more I think about it, the less amused I become.
Here is a link to that blog: Farhad Manjoo is Right and I Will Go to This Barricade With Him
Here is the full text of that entry:
"The vile perniciousness that is the second space after a period. If you do this, you are everything that is wrong and bad in this world. That is all."
The link is to an article by the titular Farhad Manjoo concerning the fact that when typing, the majority of the population still uses two spaces after a period, when in fact, contemporary thinking is that the correct formatting requires only one space.
I have to admit I am a little bit bemused by the whole thing. I have spent my entire typing life, be it at a typewriter or a computer, believing that two is the correct number of spaces to follow a period. I honestly had no idea that the times had changed. Manjoo's article gives a fairly interesting history of how the practice of typing two spaces came into being, along with when and why the professional shift back to one space occurred. He mentions multiple copy-editing and typing reference books (this is an important distinction from textbooks, I think) that have been updated to reflect the paradigm shift.
What Manjoo fails to offer, however, is a sound proposal for actually teaching new and existing typists the now correct formatting. Really he just offers a lot of anecdotes about professionals who are irritated (and wow, people are really emotional about this issue, believe it or not) at the perseverance of that second space. The blame seems to fall on the fact that typing teachers in schools everywhere continue to teach two spaces because that is the way that they were taught to type. Yes, it is a valid point that teaching methods must evolve to match the ever-changing world, especially where technology is concerned. But just updating reference books isn't going to cut it. Someone needs to mandate a change to the curriculum itself if a change is to occur. This means changing teachers' training, textbooks, course plans, ect. In the current economy (especially with regard to cutbacks in educational spending), I don't see that happening any time soon, however.
This feels a bit to me like the people who still insist that "ain't" isn't a "real" word. It is in the dictionary now folks. You may not like it, but the word has been made official through its permeation into the common vernacular. Languages change and trying to insist that they haven't is a silly thing to do. Though in this case it is something of the opposite that is true. The common "vernacular" of typing hasn't yet caught up to the change. Just because the copy-editing community has accepted that one space is the correct format, the rest of us haven't quite caught up to that yet, and I feel the professionals need to be a bit patient. You may think (or even know) that you are doing it the right way and we are all wrong, but if the "we" is the vast majority, then I gotta tell you, two spaces is still perfectly acceptable for the time being.
Especially if your biggest complaint is that the use of two spaces is wrong because it looks ugly on the page. Seriously?
Look, I am not trying to say that just because everyone is still doing it that way, that's the correct way. Clearly that is unison among the people who "know better." But. Instead of going around writing (or linking to) snotty articles, start to figure out a way to get the rest of the world on board. Nicely, preferably. The best way will probably be to mandate a change in curriculum at all levels of school, from elementary straight up through post-graduate. That won't help those of us who are out of the education system, sadly, but this is the kind of change that I think you just need to accept will take a generation or two to come to fruition.
For example, ever since I read that article, I have tried to remind myself to only use one space after a period. I made a conscious effort to do so for this blog entry, and I have to say, it was hard. At the end of almost every sentence I hit space twice and had to backspace. I am not that old, but I am a writer and I am set in my ways. I don't know if there's any changing those of us who are to this point.
I mean, there's a lot going on in my life, and the number of spaces after a period just don't enter into it most of the time, even when I am writing. The thought will flit through my mind and then be gone again, and without thinking, I am hitting that space bar twice.
So, writers, teachers? What are your thoughts? One space, or two, or does it even matter?
Update: When I originally wrote this entry (last week) I was irked that the "professionals" seemed to be getting so offended by those of us who continue to use two spaces simply because that is how we were taught and we were never told it had changed. I still think that those individuals should seek to teach the change, rather than grump about it, but I am not so sure that the one-space practice is as isolated as I thought. Since posting my blog, I have obsessively been paying attention to the number of spaces in everything I read online, and it does seem that one is far more prevalent than two nowadays. So, either I know a lot more people trained by professional writers than I had previously thought, or the word about one space is getting around much more efficiently than I believed and I, in my little bubble, just missed it. My little sister did mention she had a professor laying out the guidelines for papers recently state that she required one space, but only in the bibliographies, so I am not sure what that means. But it does seem some professors are starting to require the one space of their students in spaces, which is a good place to start proliferation of the change at least. Still, people out of school, without access to copy editors and who do not publish their writing professionally, seem to have not learned of this change. I am glad to see the next crop is (starting to, at least) be taught the correct format, and I personally can strive to make the change in my own writing, but I think we need to accept that a lot of the "old guard" as it were are beyond changing at this point.
But an entry on his blog a little while back has been rattling around in my brain ever since I read it, and the more I think about it, the less amused I become.
Here is a link to that blog: Farhad Manjoo is Right and I Will Go to This Barricade With Him
Here is the full text of that entry:
"The vile perniciousness that is the second space after a period. If you do this, you are everything that is wrong and bad in this world. That is all."
The link is to an article by the titular Farhad Manjoo concerning the fact that when typing, the majority of the population still uses two spaces after a period, when in fact, contemporary thinking is that the correct formatting requires only one space.
I have to admit I am a little bit bemused by the whole thing. I have spent my entire typing life, be it at a typewriter or a computer, believing that two is the correct number of spaces to follow a period. I honestly had no idea that the times had changed. Manjoo's article gives a fairly interesting history of how the practice of typing two spaces came into being, along with when and why the professional shift back to one space occurred. He mentions multiple copy-editing and typing reference books (this is an important distinction from textbooks, I think) that have been updated to reflect the paradigm shift.
What Manjoo fails to offer, however, is a sound proposal for actually teaching new and existing typists the now correct formatting. Really he just offers a lot of anecdotes about professionals who are irritated (and wow, people are really emotional about this issue, believe it or not) at the perseverance of that second space. The blame seems to fall on the fact that typing teachers in schools everywhere continue to teach two spaces because that is the way that they were taught to type. Yes, it is a valid point that teaching methods must evolve to match the ever-changing world, especially where technology is concerned. But just updating reference books isn't going to cut it. Someone needs to mandate a change to the curriculum itself if a change is to occur. This means changing teachers' training, textbooks, course plans, ect. In the current economy (especially with regard to cutbacks in educational spending), I don't see that happening any time soon, however.
This feels a bit to me like the people who still insist that "ain't" isn't a "real" word. It is in the dictionary now folks. You may not like it, but the word has been made official through its permeation into the common vernacular. Languages change and trying to insist that they haven't is a silly thing to do. Though in this case it is something of the opposite that is true. The common "vernacular" of typing hasn't yet caught up to the change. Just because the copy-editing community has accepted that one space is the correct format, the rest of us haven't quite caught up to that yet, and I feel the professionals need to be a bit patient. You may think (or even know) that you are doing it the right way and we are all wrong, but if the "we" is the vast majority, then I gotta tell you, two spaces is still perfectly acceptable for the time being.
Especially if your biggest complaint is that the use of two spaces is wrong because it looks ugly on the page. Seriously?
Look, I am not trying to say that just because everyone is still doing it that way, that's the correct way. Clearly that is unison among the people who "know better." But. Instead of going around writing (or linking to) snotty articles, start to figure out a way to get the rest of the world on board. Nicely, preferably. The best way will probably be to mandate a change in curriculum at all levels of school, from elementary straight up through post-graduate. That won't help those of us who are out of the education system, sadly, but this is the kind of change that I think you just need to accept will take a generation or two to come to fruition.
For example, ever since I read that article, I have tried to remind myself to only use one space after a period. I made a conscious effort to do so for this blog entry, and I have to say, it was hard. At the end of almost every sentence I hit space twice and had to backspace. I am not that old, but I am a writer and I am set in my ways. I don't know if there's any changing those of us who are to this point.
I mean, there's a lot going on in my life, and the number of spaces after a period just don't enter into it most of the time, even when I am writing. The thought will flit through my mind and then be gone again, and without thinking, I am hitting that space bar twice.
So, writers, teachers? What are your thoughts? One space, or two, or does it even matter?
Update: When I originally wrote this entry (last week) I was irked that the "professionals" seemed to be getting so offended by those of us who continue to use two spaces simply because that is how we were taught and we were never told it had changed. I still think that those individuals should seek to teach the change, rather than grump about it, but I am not so sure that the one-space practice is as isolated as I thought. Since posting my blog, I have obsessively been paying attention to the number of spaces in everything I read online, and it does seem that one is far more prevalent than two nowadays. So, either I know a lot more people trained by professional writers than I had previously thought, or the word about one space is getting around much more efficiently than I believed and I, in my little bubble, just missed it. My little sister did mention she had a professor laying out the guidelines for papers recently state that she required one space, but only in the bibliographies, so I am not sure what that means. But it does seem some professors are starting to require the one space of their students in spaces, which is a good place to start proliferation of the change at least. Still, people out of school, without access to copy editors and who do not publish their writing professionally, seem to have not learned of this change. I am glad to see the next crop is (starting to, at least) be taught the correct format, and I personally can strive to make the change in my own writing, but I think we need to accept that a lot of the "old guard" as it were are beyond changing at this point.
Friday, November 12, 2010
Now Leia Can Kick Your Butt and Look Awesome While Doing It! Also, Authors That Don't Suck Speak Out Against Those Who Kind of Do.
Yup, just another Friday here in Coriland. First things first, as it is Friday, you should go check out this week's installment of Gronk, the cutest webcomic about a monster that's ever been made. This week, Gronk shows us how the Patronus charm SFX from the Harry Potter films were done.
And speaking of Katie Cook, did you know that she has a shirt design up on Her Universe? Her what-now, you say? Ah, let me enlighten you, then! Ashley Eckstein, who voices Ahsoka Tano on Star Wars The Clone Wars, has recently started a line of Star Wars clothing (and some other forthcoming merchandise) specifically designed for WOMEN (and girls). When I say designed for females, I mean not only designs that should appeal more to females, but also clothing that is actually made to fit the female body, as opposed to your basic run of the mill unisex t-shirt.
I have to admit, when I first heard about this, I kind of didn't see the point. I have been just getting my Star Wars apparel from the guys' section since I started displaying my love of the fandom. Though I should point out I've always been something of a tomboy, especially in my fashion sense. T-shirts and jeans are my staple wardrobe. But the more I think about it, and the more I see what Ashley is doing, and more importantly, planning to do, the more excited I am getting about this. I think my two favorites are the one with the basic logo and the Ahsoka Chibi tee.
Admittedly, there have been some snags in getting the line up and running. Some people have argued that the selection isn't what they were looking for and isn't large enough, and that the prices are a bit too high. It's running at about $30 for a t-shirt (plus shipping) right now. While I see these points, they are all kind of part and parcel of this being a small company. I am planning to buy at least one shirt as soon as I can fit it in my budget. While I can understand why a lot of people don't want to pay that much for a t-shirt, I don't mind if a) the quality of the shirt is really high (which these are, from everything I have heard), and b) it is a design that is perfect for me that I can't find anywhere else. I don't see how this is any worse than someone paying $400 for a pair of shoes they're only going to wear a few times, honestly. Especially since these shirts will probably get worn way more often. It's just a matter of if it is worth it for you or not, I suppose.
I will point out, as others have, that the best way to get this company to the point where they can start offering more designs and lower prices is to go and buy something from them if you see something you like--or get someone who loves you to buy it for you if you can't afford it (Christmas is coming up, you know).
Club Jade did a lovely article explaining how awesome the existence of Her Universe truly is. The author's main point is that, you know what, it's been thirty years since Star Wars happened, and this is the first line devoted entirely to women, who, believe it or not, do make up a large part of the Star Wars fan base. The comments on the article consist of one of the most reasonable forum conversations I have ever seen online, especially in relation to Star Wars, even when people are pointing out their issues with the line. Yesterday, Ashley posted a blog up on the Her Universe site addressing most of the issues that were brought up by the Club Jade article, and what she plans to do about it. This folks, is exactly the reason why I am going to do my part to support this company. I hope you will consider doing so as well.
I managed to finish the scarf for Flick Filosopher yesterday! I am pretty happy with the hat/scarf set, although I think the next time I make one, I am going to tweak my pattern for the scarf a little bit. I felt like it ended up being a shade too wide, and while the ridged effect on the ends looks okay, I am not sure it is what I really wanted for this pattern. Other than that though I am very satisfied with the project. Now, if only Flick Filosopher lies it as well!
The pattern for the hat was Angora Tam by Lion Brand. I improvised the scarf to mirror the pattern in the hat. If you'd like to see the pattern for that written out, it is on my Ravelry page (my user name is AtlantisDragonGrl). I used one skein of Red Heart Super Saver yarn in Aruba Sea for both items.
I want to close out the week by taking a few moments to talk about my experience so far with National Novel Writing Month (or NaNoWriMo). I have to say, my secret hope of hopes with the project (as it is for almost every participant, I am sure), is to write something that I can maybe, eventually, get published. I say eventually because I realize that what I am writing right now is, at best, a first (very rough) draft. Whatever I come up with this month will be a beginning, a place to start. At the very least, I hope that by participating in NaNoWriMo this year (and probably in the years to come), I will learn something about how I personally operate as a writer, and I will get in some good practice writing so that when I finally start working on the project that is my baby (or realize that what I think is my baby in fact isn't and find something new to nurture), I will be able to do it the right way. And folks, this is exactly what NaNoWriMo is all about. It's not for every writer, certainly, but for some of us, it can be the kick in the pants we need.
Regardless of whether or not I ever get a single page published, if no one else ever reads anything I write, getting it down on the page (or screen, as the case may be), is the truly important part. I am a writer, and because of this project, I am actually writing. For me, that is the most amazing thing in the world right now. For the last couple of years I have barely written anything, and have been in a total creative slump. I was still coming up with ideas, but lacked the motivation to put any of them on the page. And now, I am 20,000+ words in on my very first actual novel. That's something incredible, and no one can take that away from me.
I can't imagine why anyone, especially a professional writer, would want to disparage NaNoWriMo for giving people like me those feelings, but that is exactly what a lot of people are doing this month. It is a very sad realization that since the first, many known authors and writers, when approached about NaNoWriMo have dismissed it as a pointless waste of time, or worse, gone on the record insulting it and the people who participate. BUT, just to prove that we are not alone, the professional authors and writers who aren't dismissive jerks have started going on the defensive for NaNoWriMo, and I am happy to say that quite a few of them are people who I read, admire, or follow online.
Mary Robinette Kowal points out that her recently released novel Shades of Milk and Honey started out as a NaNoWriMo novel. John Scalzi, spurred by her blog on the subject, posted his own entry in support of NaNoWriMo as well, and calls out the writers who are trash-talking the event to boot. There have been a few more posts that I've stumbled across, but those two yesterday just really struck a chord with me. Some authors have even been helping out us crazy participants by serving as a cheering section, writing pep-talk letters to be sent out to us. Mercedes Lackey's was my favorite so far, mostly because she suggested for anyone who is having a hard time getting past the world-building aspect and just writing to maybe start out by writing some fan fiction. It makes me happy whenever any published writer speaks out in support of fan fiction. Sure, people have gone some weird and disturbing places with it, and sure, a lot of it is terrible. But on the other hand, a lot of published writers started out in that forum (Naomi Novik, for one), and quite a few still dabble in it for fun. To me it has always seemed to be the perfect forum to practice and hone my writing style. I have to say, participating in NaNoWriMo has given me the urge to dive back into it. And if I can find a way to do that without giving my soul back to Wraithbait, then you can believe that I will give it a go. Once I get through November, that is.
Word Count Update: 22,073 out of 50,000
 | |
| Click Here For Awesomeness! |
And speaking of Katie Cook, did you know that she has a shirt design up on Her Universe? Her what-now, you say? Ah, let me enlighten you, then! Ashley Eckstein, who voices Ahsoka Tano on Star Wars The Clone Wars, has recently started a line of Star Wars clothing (and some other forthcoming merchandise) specifically designed for WOMEN (and girls). When I say designed for females, I mean not only designs that should appeal more to females, but also clothing that is actually made to fit the female body, as opposed to your basic run of the mill unisex t-shirt.
I have to admit, when I first heard about this, I kind of didn't see the point. I have been just getting my Star Wars apparel from the guys' section since I started displaying my love of the fandom. Though I should point out I've always been something of a tomboy, especially in my fashion sense. T-shirts and jeans are my staple wardrobe. But the more I think about it, and the more I see what Ashley is doing, and more importantly, planning to do, the more excited I am getting about this. I think my two favorites are the one with the basic logo and the Ahsoka Chibi tee.
 |
| Seriously, how cute is this shirt? |
Admittedly, there have been some snags in getting the line up and running. Some people have argued that the selection isn't what they were looking for and isn't large enough, and that the prices are a bit too high. It's running at about $30 for a t-shirt (plus shipping) right now. While I see these points, they are all kind of part and parcel of this being a small company. I am planning to buy at least one shirt as soon as I can fit it in my budget. While I can understand why a lot of people don't want to pay that much for a t-shirt, I don't mind if a) the quality of the shirt is really high (which these are, from everything I have heard), and b) it is a design that is perfect for me that I can't find anywhere else. I don't see how this is any worse than someone paying $400 for a pair of shoes they're only going to wear a few times, honestly. Especially since these shirts will probably get worn way more often. It's just a matter of if it is worth it for you or not, I suppose.
I will point out, as others have, that the best way to get this company to the point where they can start offering more designs and lower prices is to go and buy something from them if you see something you like--or get someone who loves you to buy it for you if you can't afford it (Christmas is coming up, you know).
Club Jade did a lovely article explaining how awesome the existence of Her Universe truly is. The author's main point is that, you know what, it's been thirty years since Star Wars happened, and this is the first line devoted entirely to women, who, believe it or not, do make up a large part of the Star Wars fan base. The comments on the article consist of one of the most reasonable forum conversations I have ever seen online, especially in relation to Star Wars, even when people are pointing out their issues with the line. Yesterday, Ashley posted a blog up on the Her Universe site addressing most of the issues that were brought up by the Club Jade article, and what she plans to do about it. This folks, is exactly the reason why I am going to do my part to support this company. I hope you will consider doing so as well.
I managed to finish the scarf for Flick Filosopher yesterday! I am pretty happy with the hat/scarf set, although I think the next time I make one, I am going to tweak my pattern for the scarf a little bit. I felt like it ended up being a shade too wide, and while the ridged effect on the ends looks okay, I am not sure it is what I really wanted for this pattern. Other than that though I am very satisfied with the project. Now, if only Flick Filosopher lies it as well!
 |
| Filosophy Tam by Cori 2010. |
 |
| Filosophy Scarf by Cori 2010. |
 | ||
| The set together. |
The pattern for the hat was Angora Tam by Lion Brand. I improvised the scarf to mirror the pattern in the hat. If you'd like to see the pattern for that written out, it is on my Ravelry page (my user name is AtlantisDragonGrl). I used one skein of Red Heart Super Saver yarn in Aruba Sea for both items.
I want to close out the week by taking a few moments to talk about my experience so far with National Novel Writing Month (or NaNoWriMo). I have to say, my secret hope of hopes with the project (as it is for almost every participant, I am sure), is to write something that I can maybe, eventually, get published. I say eventually because I realize that what I am writing right now is, at best, a first (very rough) draft. Whatever I come up with this month will be a beginning, a place to start. At the very least, I hope that by participating in NaNoWriMo this year (and probably in the years to come), I will learn something about how I personally operate as a writer, and I will get in some good practice writing so that when I finally start working on the project that is my baby (or realize that what I think is my baby in fact isn't and find something new to nurture), I will be able to do it the right way. And folks, this is exactly what NaNoWriMo is all about. It's not for every writer, certainly, but for some of us, it can be the kick in the pants we need.
Regardless of whether or not I ever get a single page published, if no one else ever reads anything I write, getting it down on the page (or screen, as the case may be), is the truly important part. I am a writer, and because of this project, I am actually writing. For me, that is the most amazing thing in the world right now. For the last couple of years I have barely written anything, and have been in a total creative slump. I was still coming up with ideas, but lacked the motivation to put any of them on the page. And now, I am 20,000+ words in on my very first actual novel. That's something incredible, and no one can take that away from me.
I can't imagine why anyone, especially a professional writer, would want to disparage NaNoWriMo for giving people like me those feelings, but that is exactly what a lot of people are doing this month. It is a very sad realization that since the first, many known authors and writers, when approached about NaNoWriMo have dismissed it as a pointless waste of time, or worse, gone on the record insulting it and the people who participate. BUT, just to prove that we are not alone, the professional authors and writers who aren't dismissive jerks have started going on the defensive for NaNoWriMo, and I am happy to say that quite a few of them are people who I read, admire, or follow online.
Mary Robinette Kowal points out that her recently released novel Shades of Milk and Honey started out as a NaNoWriMo novel. John Scalzi, spurred by her blog on the subject, posted his own entry in support of NaNoWriMo as well, and calls out the writers who are trash-talking the event to boot. There have been a few more posts that I've stumbled across, but those two yesterday just really struck a chord with me. Some authors have even been helping out us crazy participants by serving as a cheering section, writing pep-talk letters to be sent out to us. Mercedes Lackey's was my favorite so far, mostly because she suggested for anyone who is having a hard time getting past the world-building aspect and just writing to maybe start out by writing some fan fiction. It makes me happy whenever any published writer speaks out in support of fan fiction. Sure, people have gone some weird and disturbing places with it, and sure, a lot of it is terrible. But on the other hand, a lot of published writers started out in that forum (Naomi Novik, for one), and quite a few still dabble in it for fun. To me it has always seemed to be the perfect forum to practice and hone my writing style. I have to say, participating in NaNoWriMo has given me the urge to dive back into it. And if I can find a way to do that without giving my soul back to Wraithbait, then you can believe that I will give it a go. Once I get through November, that is.
Word Count Update: 22,073 out of 50,000
Thursday, October 14, 2010
I Reject Your 3D, Sir
If you follow the entertainment world at all, you've probably heard by now that the upcoming Harry Potter film, The Deathly Hallows Part 1 is not going to be released in 3D as originally planned.
HUZZAH!!!
Oh, thank God. Not that I was going to see it in 3D anyway. My husband and I would have hunted down a 2D showing. But the thing is, Warner Brothers had already been working for some time on trying to convert the film to 3D. I mean, the release is just over a month away, you would think they would have gotten that taken care of by now, right? But it was taking too long, and no one was happy with what the converted film looked like. So, instead of pushing back the release date, which would have just been evil, someone somewhere made the executive decision that it was okay to say, "Look, we screwed up. This film isn't going to work in 3D and we really don't want to delay the release, so let's just go ahead and launch it in 2D only, okay." This is a level of common sense heretofore unseen in Hollywood, at least in this century so far.
Okay, yeah, economically, it maybe seems like a bad idea, because Warner Brothers already spent a lot of money on trying to convert the film that they are now just going to have to eat. But, this is a Harry Potter movie we're talking about. As Flick Filosopher said in her reaction to this news, "Deathly Hallows could have been performed by sock puppets and it still would have made a fortune. But now it’ll make a slightly smaller fortune." This movie is going to make a ton of money no matter what. On this one, they can afford the loss of the wasted conversion attempt.
As someone who finds this growing compulsion to release every major film in 3D absolutely appalling, I am taking this news as the victory it is. Look, I get that 3D means more money for everyone because it means higher ticket prices. I would love to see some sort of comparison about how much extra profit is gleaned from those higher ticket prices after the actual cost of making the film 3D is taken into consideration though. For some films, 3D can be a great asset. Coraline utilized 3D extremely well, and while I didn't see Avatar in 3D, I understand it was another film that was accentuated with the enhancement. But the majority of the films released in 3D are not actually filmed in 3D, and are only later subjected to a (costly and timely) conversion process. And in those cases, it is completely unnecessary. It doesn't add anything to the film but a few extra dollars to the ticket price and a greater chance of headaches for the audience. If you're not going to bother to film your movie in 3D, then it probably doesn't need to be seen in 3D. I saw Up in 3D, but honestly, afterward, I wished I hadn't bothered. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely loved Up, it was fantastic, but the 3D didn't add anything to it, and having watched it several times on DVD, it hasn't lost anything at all just being seen 2D.
The 3D craze annoys the bejeezus out of me because it is not an artistic movement among filmmakers. It is just a cash grab by greedy studios. So I am ecstatic that I won't have to hunt for a 2D showing of the next Harry Potter film, and I hope its inevitable success at the box office will maybe give other studios some reason to realize that a film doesn't need to be 3D to be awesome. And maybe they'll at least think a little bit more carefully about each forthcoming film before slapping some 3D on it. I don't really believe that will happen, but I can hope at least, right?
The fact that Warner Brothers seems to be going full-speed ahead on converting part 2 of Deathly Hallows isn't too reassuring, but considering it is essentially just the second half of one very long film, maybe the problems they had with part 1 will keep cropping up and they'll scrap the plans to make that one 3D as well. Maybe? Well, fingers crossed anyway.
You can read the rest of Flick Filosohper's write-up on the news here.
John Scalzi also had a good write-up on the subject, which you can find here.
In other fun news, the 25th anniversary DVD set of Back to the Future will include some previously unreleased footage of Eric Stoltz as Marty McFly. Apparently they filmed 5 whole weeks with him in the role before deciding to switch to Michael J. Fox. Wow. It's kind of, bizarre. Check it out here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)