A friend gave me a link she found on a forum she frequents (where most of her American friends there are talking seriously about joining us up north). It happens to be the selfsame picture from Tiercel's professor.
http://home.comcast.net/~c.seibold/site1018.jpg
With the exception of one, all my south-dwelling friends were very depressed by the results of the election; the one who was pleased wouldn't give me his reasons except that he's privy to more information than most by virtue of several friends currently in active military service in Iraq. He refused to elaborate, but damn, would I ever like to know.
Although I personally would have preferred to see Kerry win, I am genuinely curious as to what Bush's supporters see in him when his methods and reasoning have so often been called into question. While I think that we *should* question our leaders every so often, Bush's flip-flops on several policies are well-documented, and I find certain actions regarding the treatment of American soldiers' physical, mental and financial well-being extremely questionable -- but maybe that's just me, I dunno. I won't even get into what I think of the Iraqi civilian casualties; Riverbend stated it clearly enough when she said, "100,000 deaths in a year and a half, and the number is rising. Keep Bush another four years and we just might hit the half-million mark..." Mind you, she wrote that November 1, and is just as disappointed at the results, if not more, as some here have already expressed, though I'm significantly less bitter than she (and selfishly glad I thus far cannot empathize with her position).
Okay, maybe not all I have to say, but I'll let the Shrub say it for me. ;) Here's a clip from The Daily Show (which continues in the same vein as the flip-flops), and here's one from Camp Chaos (a very silly but carefully edited version of Shrubya's State of the Union address).
I am not responsible for any damage done to nearby electronics by virtue of violently-expectorated fluids. ;)
On iced tea: I live in Canada, and if I want iced tea, I make my own. The companies that market their stuff here just don't do anything for me. I very rarely add sugar to any tea I drink, hot or cold, because my palate is accustomed to subtler flavors and sugar tends to overwhelm the true taste of the tea for me. Lapsang souchang is an exception. :)
On the Shrub and the circus of American politics: This is all I have to say: http://www.525reasons.com/archives/000897.html
Er, the eruption in 1980, that is. Wow, do I need sugar or what?
*goes to ransack fridge in search of that little tub of cake icing*
I remember reading the National Geographic magazine covering the eruption, complete with pictures of the whole thing, and being at once fascinated and terrified by the article.
When Gaia gets stomachaches, she sure gets them something awful. :P Glad I'm up north.
I "suddenly" feel the need to...apostrophate in s'trange place's while dining...on the "TURKEY WITH TRIMINGS" I saw advertis'ed "nearby".
Teresa: Hee, "fractal with lacunae", indeed. Love it. :)
Thurls: All I did was skim the ad, and my editing Muse tried to claw her eyes out. Wonderful thing, unfiltered saké...
Many thanks, James and Christopher. Neil Gaiman's mentioned Bugmenot in his blog before, but for the life of me I couldn't remember it. *duh*
I read Ms. Rice's assertion that if someone didn't like the book, they were reading it the wrong way: a classic case of an author defensively protecting her preciousss. In all fairness, I've never read any of her stuff, though I did see the movie adaptation of Interview with the Vampire (which I know isn't the same thing as reading it), so I can't comment on the quality of her writing. If I could respond to her, however, it would be to say, "Your readers do not live with these characters in their heads the way you do, and so can't be faulted for being unable to understand either them or your writings of them the way you are able."
I'm inclined to think this is a relatively fair assessment since it seems to be true of more or less every writer; I know I've got at least one or two characters who've taken up permanent residence in my brain (my friend Danielle calls them "head critters") and occasionally demand I Tell This Story of Mine RIGHTNOWthankyouverymuch. Yes, I know I'm hopeless. :)
I'm also inclined to wonder just where Ms. Rice got her impression of editors. :P
Marilee: The NYTimes website requires registration before one can read the article. I can't be arsed to fill in all the fields -- but then I'm pausing in the midst of a book I need to finish reading today and a script I need to read by tomorrow, so I have an excuse. *augh* Got the general gist of it?
Livia: I was responding to Teresa's comment with regards to those who specifically don't do the research but instead get the impression it's a cakewalk anyone can dance and refuse well-meant attempts at enlightenment. It wasn't intended to be a sweeping generalization of all unpublished writers, and I apologize if it seemed that way. Rest assured that I do know not all unpublished writers are like Daniel Rice: I'm one of them myself. :)
Teresa: Thank you for the kind welcome, and sorry my inaugural comment had to be such a monster. :)
There's a saying (I believe it's Arab) which goes, "If one person calls you a donkey, ignore them. If another person calls you a donkey, ignore them. If a third person calls you a donkey, buy yourself a saddle." I think the most we can do is gently tell such wanna-be writers they may have been misinformed, then point them to the proper resources and suggest they spend some time gathering more information.
If they respond by calling us know-it-all bastards who are just jealous/trying to keep their preciousss in the dark/think they're stupid, and continue to be obstinate, then all we can do is shrug and say, "Oh well, we tried," then calmly recall a quote from the inimitable Harlan Ellison: "The two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity."
You put it very well when you said, "I'm appalled by their vulnerability, but I don't sympathize with their ignorance." The poor things see books being made into films and think writing is an easy way to success, but forget not only how many hours went into writing those books -- never mind how bloody hard it is to write to deadline -- but also how it's maybe one author in five thousand who is so lucky, and there's no guarantee they'll be that one. Very, very few people can afford to write for a living, but our get-rich-quick-and-easy entertainment culture cheerfully sweeps that fact under a glittering rug. The wanna-bes are so blinded by the glitter that they never notice the bumps in the rug.
I know I'm preaching to the choir ;) but I'm saying this as much for the benefit of those with popcorn as I am anyone without. Oh well, we tried. :)
*is referred here by a very well-read friend and clicks upon link innocently*
...
o.o
.....
O.O
.......
Blessed Buddha on a pogo stick.
*goes to get a drink of high alcohol content to settle gibbering brain*
Ahem. Well. I've spent the better part of the evening going through this thread, and I have to admit that I shook my head in unsurprised disbelief the entire time. Like some frequenting this lovely place, I too am a professional writer and editor (I do copyediting and substantive editing, for those who might be curious), and although I've edited for friends free of charge -- never mind that some of these friends are in high and well-established places -- I've always been both thorough and honest with my crit. I will now do that here.
Teresa, m'love, you've the patience of a saint to settle for disemvowelling Daniel's posts; by now I probably would have either deleted them or, even more simply, banned him from posting altogether. Everyone else, you've been for the most part not only utterly wonderful and helpful with your constructive criticism, but also excruciatingly civil well beyond the call of duty.
I may be making a mistake here, but -- Daniel Rice, I have a fair bit to say to you.
First off: I really am an editor, not yet another stranger trying to bash your stuff, so you may rest your fears on that score. ;P I'm not going to repeat what these people have said about how your writing skills could use improvement or how you may be better served by learning more on the ways of the writing business. It didn't come across as the good advice it was then, so I don't anticipate it will now; therefore, I won't bother. Suffice it to say that every author, published or not, always has potential for further growth; the really good ones never lose sight of this fact.
Secondly: No one buys or reads incomplete manuscripts. Submitting one tells the would-be buyer that you were in too much of a hurry to bother finishing it and will assume, often rightfully so, that you failed to pay attention to their submission criteria. Why? When you're a slushpile reader and you have no less than forty sheaves of copy clamoring for equal attention, you simply don't have the time to wait on one that's not done. While posting your work for sale on eBay was an interesting move, nobody will purchase a manuscript they haven't read beforehand. On a related note, you say in your eBay ad that "my manuscript is not yet copyrighted". Actually, it already is: according to both Canadian and American copyright laws, intellectual property is copyrighted as soon as it's produced -- it's not necessary to register it with any office for you to claim yourself its creator -- and unless you purposely sign away any rights of ownership to the work in a contract with your buyer, it's still yours. Keep in mind as well that while Canada recognizes a creator's moral rights -- which include the author's right to be associated with the work by name or pseudonym and the right to remain anonymous, and include the author's right to the integrity of the work (that is, the author's right to stop the work from being distorted, mutilated or modified, to the prejudice of the author's honour or reputation, or from being used in association with a product, service, cause or institution); source, Bowley Kerr Collins -- the US does not.
Thirdly: You want a professional author to buy your work -- yet you yourself see nothing wrong with behaving in what has been to date a distinctly unprofessional manner? It is an unfortunate fact of the business that how you behave in public forums -- including the Internet, which is extremely public and infinitely archivable -- reflects upon and colors your work as a whole. Were I a publishing house's acquisitions employee who looked at your eBay listing and then saw how you treated the responses to it, I would definitely have nothing to do with you. Why? Because it is obvious to me that unless I were one of those big-name authors, you would not respect me, and getting a reputation for disrespecting those either in the writing business or with connections to it is the fastest way to alienate all of them; industry people talk to each other, often sharing info about negative dealings, and bad news spreads like wildfire in a dry forest, especially in a relatively small industry/genre. It won't matter two frags if you've got the most brilliant story on the planet, for once they get wind you're difficult to work with (ie. not open to receiving criticism of any kind), your manuscript will most likely remain unpurchased until it rots on the shelf.
I've read your eBay listing, including the snippet of text you posted with it. In light of what I've read both there and your interactions here, I see no compelling reason to recommend your work for purchase to anyone. It's simply a case of you starting off on the wrong foot only to break your partner's ankle; why should anyone else want to dance with you when there are many better dancers out there?
| Year | Number of comments posted |
|---|---|
| 2004 | 13 |
Total: 13 comments. View all these comments on a single page.
The most recent 20 comments posted to Making Light by Nishiko Takeuchi:
Show all comments by Nishiko Takeuchi.