|
|
Posted in Writing 8 February 2010 19:11
In some uses, you can use couple without of:
- They are a couple.
- It is a retreat for couples.
In others, you cannot:
- I will list a couple of examples here.
- She has a couple of books in her house.
Here’s the key: replace couple with pair, and see if you need of:
- They are a pair.
- It is a retreat for pairs.
- NOT: It is a retreat for pairs of.
- I will list a pair of examples here.
- NOT: I will list a pair examples here.
- She has a pair of books in her house.
- NOT: She has a pair books in her house. (We’ll disregard the fact that “couple” in this usage was probably not meant to be literal.)
End o’ the rant. Please carry on.
Posted in Writing 6 February 2010 13:32
I’m getting a little tired of hearing all the same old sad, irrelevant arguments brought to bear in the defense of piracy.
-
Piracy isn’t really stealing, because the so-called victim of the piracy never loses anything.
-
Piracy isn’t a violation of copyright law, because you’re making a copy for your own personal use, and that’s legal.
-
Copyright law was never intended to protect the artists, it was intended to protect the printers.
-
The only people rooting for the preservation of copyright law are the big corporations, because all it does is perpetuate their profit model.
-
Copyright law is immoral because a worker who creates an original work for an employer never holds the copyright to it.
-
Copyright law is immoral because so-called “content” is information and information should be free because it is in the best interest of the common good.
-
Since the incremental cost of digital distribution is near zero, the price of digital work should be near zero.
-
Artists will always produce art, whether they get paid for it or not, because it is in their blood.
-
It is immoral for any artist to make more off their art than I declare reasonable.
-
Blah blah blah blah blah …
But rule number one, life’s Standing Order Number One, is “Always identify the problem.”
The problem here is very simple, and it has nothing at all to do with the fairness or validity or history or purpose or origins of copyright law.
It’s the piracy, stupid!
In actual point of fact, none of the arguments above, and most of the arguments I haven’t listed, have anything at all to do with the problem, which is that we seem to have raised an entire generation who want something for nothing. Yes, I know. That’s a generalization, and it’s as unfair as any such statement, but it has become increasingly obvious that there is a generational divide in operation here.
Want to know where the ducks are? Look to where the shotguns are pointed. And in the battle over piracy, the guns are pointed squarely at copyright law. Why? Because it’s the one thing standing between the pirates and their victims. And what does that mean? That we, as artists, as creators of intellectual property, must protect the existing copyright law. It may not be perfect. It may not be what it was intended to be. It may not exist for the reasons we think it should, but the fact of the matter is that, as it stands now, copyright law is an impediment to the progress of the pirates.
Of course copyright law protects the printers, when they are the copyright holders.
Of course copyright law prevents information from being free. Your social security number, bank account number, and current bank balance are information. Are you going to make it free?
Of course artists will always produce art, but will you ever get to see it?
The only way to guarantee the continued production of any art, whether it is fiction, painting, drawing, or hand-decorated mud pies, is to see to it that the creator is granted full protection under law from the theft of that art. If the artist chooses to transfer that copyright, as part of some contract, to a printer, publisher, or other third party, that is their right.
Stop talking about whether piracy is theft or not.
Stop talking about whether copyright is moral or not.
Start asking yourself this:
What is a world without any art going to look like?
Posted in Writing 4 February 2010 09:40
This is a portion of a conversation already under way. Please read the following post first:
And be warned: he’s going to point you to a post or two you should read even before that, so if you haven’t kept up with this conversation, go ahead and get caught up. We’ll wait.
Ok, for those of you who haven’t kept up with this issue, and who didn’t go read Luke’s post, here’s an excerpt:
Both of Mark’s scenarios that don’t involve the taking of something from someone else, but still involve physical piracy (free newspaper and concert), stem from the same given: content creators have a right to decide how, why, when, and where their content is experienced, if for no other reason than they created that content. I’m not sure I agree with that given as it stands… [emphasis added – LM]
People should only have a right to distribute content if their profits from said content are reasonable. What right, beyond the creation itself do I have to price my novel at such an exorbitant price? I created the content, but if the book is so good that it might improve lives, what right do I have to price it so only a few lives can be improved?
Some of the following is actually a reworking of a comment I left on Luke’s blog, but I’m including it here for the sake of completeness (and for those of you who didn’t bother to go read it. Go read it. Really. We’ll wait. Really. While you’re there, subscribe to mispeled. Also Ditchwalk. Both are required reading.)
Before I go any further, I should mention that I know Luke Bergeron nearly as well as I know anyone else that I’ve only met online, and within the constraints of cyberspace, I consider him a friend. I’ve read his novel-in-progress, and it’s a great read. None of the following is to be taken as an attack.
But seriously, Luke? I don’t have the right to price my book at $10,000,000 a copy? (Oh, look. Someone just decided to go read that post after all.)
- If my house has three hundred bedrooms, does it become a hotel, and can I charge for the rooms in my hotel, or must it be free?
- If my yard extends beyond some maximum of good taste, does it become a de facto park? May I charge admission?
- If I drove to the job I don’t have in a 14-passenger van, would that make me a bus service? May I charge fares?
- Do I have the right to create a sculpture and put it in my living room, where no one will ever see it?
- Suppose I take a photograph of wake patterns in Deception Pass, from the bridge there, on a perfect grey day? Suppose I chose not to make it available, but to only hang it in my dining room? Do I have that right?
- Suppose I can do perfect impersonations of every president since the dawn of recording technology, but I refuse to do so for anyone except my wife? Do I have this right?
But someone has said that all comparisons are odious and someone else has said that analogies always break down, so let’s go back to books.
- If I don’t have the right to price my novel at $10,000,000 per copy, and if the denial of that right hinges upon the fact that some people cannot afford that price, then what price may I set? $24.95? There seem to be a lot of books released at that price, for hardcover, at least, but there are a lot of people that can’t pay $24.95 for a book. There are people that can’t afford a buck for a book.
- If I don’t have the right to limit readership based on price, then may I limit readership based on scarcity? You mention selling three copies to the three richest people on Earth. Suppose I write a novel, make three handmade copies of it, and give them to those same three people for free? Is this not just as unacceptable?
- If I don’t have the right to limit readership based on scarcity, then do I even have the right to not write at all? I have a fifth novel completed, but not published. My wife and some of my horde of offspring have read it. @JESeanachai has read it. Can I leave it at that? Do I have the right to not publish this novel at all? Do I have the right to limit the readership of A Place to Die to those few who have already read it?
- Do you have the right to not publish your novel, which I’ve read, but most of the population of the planet hasn’t? It’s a great book, a lot of people would like it, it could effect the lives of many people. Is it more immoral for you to publish it at $10,000,000 per copy, at $24.95, for free, or not at all?
I think I said it best in the comment:
I don’t care if it’s a novel, a software company, or the cure for all cancers, it’s property. It belongs to someone.
In the portion of your blog post that I quoted above, you seem to exclude from this discussion the “taking of something from someone else.” I can’t help but wonder why. Could it be that “something” can be owned, but “content” cannot? Could it be that if I own “something” I can charge what I want for it, but not if I only own “content”?
In a world where everything was given away free, then perhaps we could all afford to give things away free, but this isn’t that world. It’s never going to be, and requiring certain things to be given away (or idly standing by and allowing them to be) isn’t even the first step in getting there. You say that if my yard is too big, it becomes a park, that if my house is too big, it becomes a hotel, and yet you say that if you won a million dollars in hard cash in the lottery, you would invest enough that you would never have to work again. I say that a million dollars is too much for one man. I say that you have to find the poorest man on Earth and keep as much as he has. Give the rest away.
I don’t say any of that actually, nor will I accept the stipulation that the “the ultimate goal of long-term capitalism” is for one man to own the entire planet (the ultimate goal of long-term capitalism would obviously have to include a thriving market, which implies the existence of a lot of other people who own things, and the ultimate actuality of long-term capitalism (if we could ever get there) would be the existence of cheap, readily available fiction, art, and cures for cancer, but that’s another rant). But there certainly are people who say that owning one penny more than you “need” (by their definition, not yours or mine) is a sin (against God, god, or gods) and a crime against humanity. There certainly are people who say that extreme poverty as a way of life is a form of holiness. When you win your million dollars, are you going to let them decide how much you need to invest?
If there were a place where writers could just crank stuff out and let it go out into the world to sink or swim, I’d pack today. I’d live there in peace and happiness the rest of my life, writing my stories like the guy in Snow Crash spins his ideas out into the Metaverse to live free.
But until then, writers have to be paid, or we’re going to be stuck with amateur fiction forever.
Posted in Novels 23 January 2010 10:31
All she wants is to hide her scarred face. All he wants is to take the perfect portrait.
Sometimes the deepest secrets are hidden behind the thinnest veils.
The first five chapters of Light Always Changes are up now. If you’re getting impatient, you can buy the book here.
introduction chapter one chapter two chapter three chapter four chapter five
Posted in Writing 23 January 2010 10:17
Back in the olden dayes…
(…when I was but a wee lad…)
It was fairly common to see a note in the back of the book that read something like this:
A Dark and Stormy Night at the Morgue was set in 12-point Baskerville Old Face and printed on 80-pound 100% linen rag stock.
So my questions are:
- Whatever happened to that note? Why don’t we see it anymore?
- When was the last time you did see it?
- Is that something you ever went looking for?
- Would you like to see it come back? If someone handed you a magic scepter and said “You’re emperor of the universe! Make stuff happen!” would this be on the list?
It’s not a quiz. You don’t have to answer all of them, and there’s neither a grade nor a prize, but I am curious.
Posted in Novels 16 January 2010 10:04
Posted in Reviews 12 January 2010 11:54
Empty stomachs, beaten bodies, and silenced mouths remain still only so long. Then they roar.
–Dead Bird in the Weeds, by J.E. Seanachaí
One of the continuous threads of human history is our unrelenting war upon ourselves.
It is difficult to imagine that there is a nation or people on Earth that has not been both conquered and conqueror in its time. In the spring of 1798, the common folk of Ireland, long the conquered, threw off the yoke of British oppression and became, for a time, the conqueror.
This war for independence, like all wars of all times, was fought not by nations, but by people, by men and women and children whose lives, win lose or draw, are changed forever by the battles they fight.
Dead Bird in the Weeds, the debut novel of J.E. Seanachaí, is not a novel of war, although it follows its characters through a tragic and bloody revolution. This is a novel of people, of life and love, of fear and hatred, of time and the inevitable and irreversible change that every moment brings with it. The people whose stories are told in Dead Bird in the Weeds are irrevocably changed by their months in the battlefields, and this change is clearly rung throughout the book by the periodic changes in their names. When I saw the note in the front of the book warning me that this would happen, I was afraid it would be confusing, unnecessary, perhaps even just a little coy, and yet when Anastasia became Muirghein, it was so thoroughly mandated by the story that it was as simple and as natural as turning the next page, as though I had turned a page in the life of a girl named Anastasia and found, on the next page, a young woman named Muirghein. Later, when Muirghein becomes Aisling, the change is even more powerfully right.
I’m not going to pretend that Dead Bird in the Weeds is a perfect novel. It isn’t, and no novel ever will be. At times, I found the diction to be irregular and confusing, and there were scenes that didn’t seem to fit the storyline. Even as long as this novel is (over 180,000 words, I’m told), there were parts that were summarized that I felt should have been done as scenes. (As a side note to those of you who happen to have seen this book, and happen to know what a stickler I am for the conventions of printing and typography, let me just mention that shortly after I ordered my copy of this novel, I was contacted by Seanachaí, who told me that there was a second edition coming out which would fix all of things you’re wondering why I’m not mentioning.)
Make no mistake, though: J.E. Seanachaí is a skilled and competent writer who, at her best, reaches excellence.
Dead Bird in the Weeds is a strong first novel, a gripping and compelling read from an author I hope to hear a lot more from over the coming years.
I emailed J.E. Seanachaí to ask her a few questions:
1) With a name like Seanachaí, you know you’re going to get this question, so I’m going to go ahead and ask it. What personal investiture do you have in this subject? What brought you to write a novel about the Irish Rebellion of 1798?
My father’s family emigrated from Ireland in the mid-eighteenth century and the family farm they established in Ohio is still in existence and operation. When you’re living and working in an environment steeped in tradition, you’re also taking part in preserving history. As a result, I’m a historical nut, reading as many primary texts as I can procure. My family often jokes that I was born two hundred years too late, and sometimes I tend to agree. Why choose the 1798 rebellion? First, I enjoy studying about rebellions regardless of their country of origin. I’m also interested in their cause and the passions they arouse in seemingly quiescent people. Second, after first hearing the revolutionary song "Boolavogue," I was never able to quench the desire to learn more about the cause that "set the heather blazing and brought the neighbours from far and near." When a song can arouse enthusiasm about an event that happened over two hundred years ago, the cause and effect stratagem is worthy of further study.
2) I’ll never write any historical fiction, unless you count my childhood and teen years as history. Actually, my children would tell you that’s prehistory. Anyway, I don’t like the thought of all that research. How long did you put into researching this novel, and what form did that research take? What’s the strangest thing you learned?
For every hour I spent writing, I spent an hour researching. No, let me correct that. For every hour I spent writing, I spent two hours researching. If the writer chooses to time travel, the writer must become one of the natives. If you don’t, the natives (your characters) will be lifeless and living a lie. To initiate myself into their world, I read every primary source I could find about the 1798 rebellion. I didn’t stop there. I researched every aspect of that time period, including the grammar, clothing, and other writings published during that time. Diaries are also great sources detailing firsthand experiences of everyday situations. I think one of the oddest occurrences I happened upon was the explanation of the making of hair lacquer and discovering its main ingredient was pig fat. I don’t think I’ll be using it any time soon.
3) Recognizing that this is a first novel, and that many authors later feel that their first novels do not hold up their end of the author’s opus, what would you do differently in a second novel?
I think the best way I can answer this question is to give advice I wish I had been given:
- Stay focused.
- Be excited.
- You will always need to research, even if your novel takes place in your backyard.
- Always, always, always get input about your writing and study the craft of other writers.
- Realize that you will never discover all there is to know about writing, but understand that you are responsible for achieving the highest level of proficiency as possible.
- Never rely solely on others for editing or proofreading.
- Never depend on software to perform properly.
- Never give up. Ever. One of my teachers told me I didn’t have the ability or intelligence to take advanced English/writing courses. I’ve spent the majority of my life proving her wrong. Without her negative comments I never would have been so determined to succeed.
4) Is there anything else you’d like to say about yourself or your book? Do you have any upcoming projects we should all keep our eyes out for?
As readers march into this retelling of the 1798 Rebellion, I want them to realize that I don’t twist or fabricate history for the sake of art. I retell the events and battles as they actually happened because I don’t believe in realigning or romanticizing fact for the sake of a happy ending or some other inexplicable or inexcusable reason. I also believe readers will understand that this story is not just about an ill-fated revolution. It’s about a pivotal moment in life and the search for the courage to love, to die, and most importantly, to live. My future plans are sketchy, but they do involve another work of fiction. I joke a lot about "writing in my head," but in fact that’s what I always do before committing myself to an outline. "Writing in my head" means I’m compiling images or snapshots of scenes and imagining the characters’ situations (mentally, physically, etc.). Why do I do this? For me it saves time. I don’t want to waste time plotting an outline without direction or losing myself in a project I cannot remain excited about. This strategy prevents me from writing myself into an abyss as the first words hit the page. Readers can look for the re-release of Dead Bird in the Weeds and my second novel, Haunted Voices from My Past: True Narratives of an Ohio Family. Both will be reissued in an easier-to-read format. Readers can also learn about forthcoming projects at http://jeseanachai.blogspot.com and www.sunflowerfootsteps.com/forthcoming.
This interview has been so enjoyable. I’m glad I had the opportunity to discuss my work and life with you. Thanks for all of the great questions, Levi.
And thank you, J.E. Seanachaí, both for a great read, and for your time! I’ll be watching for more work from you, I assure you.
Posted in Writing 11 January 2010 09:56
As all three of my regular readers know, I have a list of what I call “the basic tools of the writer.” These are (in no particular order) spelling, punctuation, diction, syntax, and grammar. I periodically get emails about one or another of this list, typically doing one of two things: either telling me what a whack-job I am for thinking there are right ways or wrong ways to spell things, order words in a sentence, or choose among the various forms and inflections a word offers, or asking me what in the world diction is.
To the first, I say that if teh is a perfectly valid way to spell the, then so is xdz. If there is no “correct” spelling, then how can any spelling possibly be incorrect? If there is no “correct” syntax (the branch of grammar dealing with the construction of sentences), then “He threw the ball to her” and “He threw her to the ball” obviously mean exactly the same thing. Yes, language changes. Words are made up, every single one of them, and there is nothing in life that says we’re done doing that. Words will be made up every day in every language, words will change meanings, words will change spellings. But unless and until a new spelling or meaning ceases to be seen as sub-standard, then if you use it, your writing will be seen, by extension, as sub-standard. If that’s what you want, that’s fine by me.
To the second group, the ones asking what diction is, I say this:
Diction (as in dictionary) is word choice.
Stories are made up of words (and words inherently tell, they do not show, but that’s a different rant). Word choice may very well be the single most important tool an author has available. One of the most memorable assignments from all of the creative writing classes I ever took (all of which were in high school – all my post-secondary education is in industrial design and manufacturing technology) was this:
- Pick a story from today’s news. Pick one for which you can see a “pro” side and a “con” side, such as a report of an alleged crime, in which you can assume guilt or innocence.
- Get out your trusty thesaurus and change the article. You’re going to do this twice, once making the article strongly “pro,” and once making it strongly “con.”
- You’re going to do this solely by replacing words with different words, words listed as synonyms of the word you’re changing.
Do not add or subtract anything, do not use any scare quotes (the “alleged” suspect, etc), don’t use any antonyms. Replace every word you think needs to be changed, but only with a synonym. You might be amazed at how differently you look at words (and at the news stories you read) after trying this a few times.
The word you’re looking for isn’t just different.
It’s the right word. There is one perfect word for the use you have in mind. There are a bunch more that are close enough and will work, and there are a bunch of choices that are just plain wrong, synonym or not. You can’t just change words because they seem too simple, or too common, or too over-used. Pick a register of diction and use it, at least for that one character, or that particular encounter, or whatever. When a character says “Put on your trousers,” we get an entirely different resonance than if the character says “Put on your pants.” The words themselves carry different denotations and different connotational clouds, and the use of a particular word also says something about the character.
So watch your diction!
Further reading:
How to Write Badly Well, 11 Jan 2010
There’s No Such Thing as a Synonym
Posted in Writing 10 January 2010 12:33
What do you call a short story, a novella, or a novel?
I had an interesting discussion some time back with another self-publisher. Not a fiction author, to the best of my knowledge; he was writing cookbooks, but that doesn’t really change anything. I told him I had written nine novellas, and that I liked the form quite a bit. He said, “Yeah, that eighty-to-one-hundred-thousand-word range, that’s nice because you have enough room to expand on an idea, but you’re not writing a full-length novel.” It turned out that he felt anything under 80,000 words is a short story.
Now, I admit that a couple of my novellas are shortish, because I tend to write short, period, but the shortest one of the bunch comes to over thirty pages, and that’s a pretty long short story, while the longest is only about eighty pages, certainly not a novel. That’s why I publish them in books of four.
So here are my questions:
- What are the break-points?
- What’s a short story?
- What’s a novella?
- Is the term “novelette” as ugly to you as it is to me, and if you use it, what does it mean?
- How short can a novel be?
- How long can a novel be?
I know, there are a bunch of places online that have lists of such terms, and I was going to list some links here, but I decided to let you do your own research, or post your answers based on what you believe now with no additional research. Please do, however, feel free to support your beliefs with evidence and sources.
Personally, I’m betting no consensus emerges.
Posted in Novels 10 January 2010 12:07
This novel will be posted one chapter per week, but the book is finished and available to be ordered in print.
all she wants is to hide her scarred face all he wants is to take the perfect portrait
There’s one desk left in the far right row, second desk from the back. She hangs her bag on the seatback, sits down, swings her hair over her cheek. She begins to doodle, tiny flowers and leaves along the very edge of the cover of her spiral notebook.
“Hi! Lydia, right?” She raises her head, but doesn’t look away from her flowers.
“You probably didn’t notice me, but I was in your last class. That’s how I know your name.” In her peripheral vision, she can see his hand come up toward her. She reaches up and hooks her hair behind her ear. Turns to face him.
“Hello,” she says, her voice as stretched and tight as the skin of her cheek.
“I’m Tanner,” he says, his smile unchanged.
sometimes the deepest secrets are hidden behind the thinnest veils
|
Doesn't the sun always come up again?
You cannot be yourself until you know who you are.

Fear is a powerful enemy. But it’s a powerful ally, too.

Sometimes, life just isn’t like a storybook.
Or copy this text and paste it into your RSS reader's "Add subscription" box:
http://www.levimontgomery.com/index.php/feed/
|