slaymesoftly: (Default)
[personal profile] slaymesoftly
LOL - so, I'm MIA more often than not and the "daily doozies" have become more of an annual thing. My apologies. RL is what it is, fandom (my teeny little corner) is what it is (not what it was). I'm not reading as much in fandom and what I do read is pretty good and has little to set off a doozie, so.... excuses, excuses. As you may or may not know, RL, now that I've retired from going to work at a school everyday, consists of catching up on twenty years of neglect of yard and house (very much still a wip) and a "part-time" job as a copy and submissions editor for a niche publishing company that is growing by leaps and bounds. The result is that I spend a lot of time reading, and a lot of time thinking about writing, grammar, punctuation, etc. but have little time left over for my own writing (admittedly somewhat influenced by having been writing the same characters for so many years I'm running out of steam) and even less time to think about things like this community.

I'm not leaving it - which is probably how it sounds - just explaining why you rarely see a post anymore. It is a community, though, and any member is welcome to share things with everyone. Doesn't need to be just me. :)

Anyway, in the interest of proving I'm not dead, I want to share this excellent blog entry about working with and around all those "never do this or that" rules that you see given out freely by everyone from actual successful writers to creative writing teachers. This sums up really well that, as important as rules are, knowing how and when to make an exception can set you apart from everyone else who is learning to write. Rules are good, and important to know, but a slavish devotion to any one person's opinion of how you should express yourself is not going to work out well in the long run (unless you are trying to appear to be a clone of said "authority". Here is the text, the link to the blog is below. Enjoy!

Read more... )
slaymesoftly: (Default)
[personal profile] slaymesoftly
I know I've been shamefully remise about posting on here (and even worse on the DW version). I should do better. *sigh* Anyway, picked up this link from someone on FB and it is clear and easy to understand. So, if you struggle with subject/verb agreement, this is for you.

Fun Stuff

Apr. 4th, 2013 05:26 pm
slaymesoftly: (Default)
[personal profile] slaymesoftly
Found on FB, from a site called MentalFloss: Words that are their own opposites and Words that mean very different things in American and English. Have fun!

Read more... )
And here's the one that will resonate with folks on both sides of the pond:

Read more... )
slaymesoftly: (RRU)
[personal profile] slaymesoftly
Links to two sites with writerly stuff - the first one shows (cleverly) the 7 basic plots that we see over and over. Which is not to say you shouldn't use them - they are how things usually go in a good story. The challenge for us is to use them in original ways so that the story develops as it should, but in such a way that it seems fresh.

https://www.facebook.com/Writers.Write.Company

And the second one and it's accompanying artwork is more tongue in cheek and amusing, but still quite useful as it shows us 42 Essential Third Act Twists (meant for plays, but obviously adaptable to any story)

http://dresdencodak.com/2009/05/11/42-essential-3rd-act-twists/

Enjoy!
slaymesoftly: (RRU)
[personal profile] slaymesoftly
For all those thinking about doing something with your original works -

http://valeriestasik.com/self-publishing-resource-handout.html

Fun stuff

Feb. 9th, 2013 01:36 pm
slaymesoftly: (RRU)
[personal profile] slaymesoftly
I'm hoping the link below works - if it doesn't, I'll have to copy/past the article . We'll see. This is Gene Weingarten's column in tomorrows Washington Post Magazine. Fun and informative stuff about our evolving language.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/magazine/gene-weingarten-gene-writes-the-wrongs/2013/02/05/e6dc2a64-60c8-11e2-9940-6fc488f3fecd_story.html


ETA - the link works. Enjoy!
slaymesoftly: (RRU)
[personal profile] slaymesoftly
I love this. Many essays or lists on writing advice from well-known authors make me cringe. Yes, there are some things you should/shouldn't do, but in something as creative as writing nothing is cut and dried. There are no "musts", there is what works for you and your style, and for your audience. Anyone reading writing advice should learn to weed through it and pick out the things that make sense for you and ignore the things that seem silly or too dogmatic.


http://www.flavorwire.com/364797/bad-writing-advice-from-famous-authors/view-all


Which, BTW, is not to say that you can or should disregard generally accepted "rules" for writing well. It's good to know what they are and why they exist. Then, when you understand why a particular "rule" is important, you can make an informed decision about when and where to ignore it. An example might be "never use an epithet; always use the name or a pronoun". Okay, yes, a whole story of paragraphs full of "the blond vampire" or even "the vampire" when "Spike" or "he" would have worked can make you want to scream "I know what he is!!!!" However, if you've got a long scene between, say Spike and Xander, and there is a lot of room for pronoun confusion ("he"? "him"? "his"? who he? which him? whose?) and yet repeating their names with each change of character begins to seem ridiculous, then an occasional "the vampire" might be warranted - particularly if his being a vampire is somewhat important to the scene. Moderation in everything might be the lesson to take away from most writing advice. And know what you're doing and have a good reason for it.

Said good reason NOT being because some published author you've read does it like that...

words!

Jan. 12th, 2013 10:29 am
slaymesoftly: (pic#795869)
[personal profile] slaymesoftly
From the wonderful [personal profile] petzipellepingo today, the below link to a list of words to keep in the language. (As a balance to those more common "words to banish because we're sick of them" lists) Interestingly enough, there were two words on this list (one for sure) that are going to be familiar to readers of fanfic. Waaaaay too familiar, perhaps....

http://petzipellepingo.dreamwidth.org/2705256.html#cutid1

ETA: Sorry, forgot petzi's post would be flocked. Here's the url for the actual article:

http://www.freep.com/article/20130111/FEATURES/130111063/Mawkish-troglodytes-among-words-Wayne-State-seeks-to-save-from-extinction?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE
slaymesoftly: (Spikefanfic)
[personal profile] slaymesoftly
Link to a blog about editing (and writing) that contains other links to other writing blogs. I have mixed emotions about coming down too hard on this particular writing sin, but their examples of incorrect use are hilarious and not actually all that out there. I've seen worse!

http://nancyfriedman.typepad.com/away_with_words/2013/01/word-of-the-week-said-bookism.html
slaymesoftly: (pic#795869)
[personal profile] slaymesoftly
I was going to do something on canon/fanon soon, but haven't managed to sort out my thoughts yet. In lieu of that, here's a worthy addition to our frequently confused words list; one that I snagged from aadler who apparently has a list of his own. :)

"Grammar/language peeve of the day:
flaunt/flout

Not sure where this one comes from, other than people simply not bothering to learn the actual meanings of words that sound vaguely similar, but here goes.

flaunt: to display ostentatiously or impudently [flaunting his superiority]

flout: to treat with contemptuous disregard [flouting the rules]

Get it? One is a display, the other is a treatment. Sound alike, but nowhere near the same usage or meaning."

~~~~~~~~

I really need to stop calling these "daily" doozies, don't I? *sigh*

beta?

Dec. 18th, 2012 09:07 pm
slaymesoftly: (pic#795869)
[personal profile] slaymesoftly
I don't know how many are following RRU here on DW, but since LJ is down and saying they're working on it....

I'm getting requests (on the BSV usually) from writers who would like/need betas, but don't know how to find them. We do have a beta list on the LJ Riters_R_Us, but I don't think it's been updated or added to in years. The two authors I have in mind right now are writing decent enough stories (or seem to be, I've only seen a chapter or two, so far), but they have some punctuation, grammar, and sentence structure issues and could use some help. As is my custom if/when new authors at the BSV want me to, I beta (very thoroughly, including style issues, characterizations, etc) the first chapter of any rejected story for them so that they can see what they need help with, as well as what to expect from a very thorough beta job. One of the authors has two (!) betas, but they missed a huge number of typos, as well as some incorrect speech tags and other punctuation. The other doesn't have a beta and asked me where she could find one.

I'd love to start a beta list here, on the DW RRU, so that I have some place to which I can refer authors. The two I've mentioned above are not by any means the only people who have asked about betas or had trouble finding one, they just happen to be the two who happened to need help in the same week. They would also, I expect, be very rewarding to work with as the stories seem like they will be interesting, the authors are accepting of their need for some assistance, and they seem to be capable of learning quickly.

So, if you've got some time and some skills, sign yourself up. We'll just make a tag for the beta list and hope for the best. Don't forget, if you're not a grammar expert, but have a wonderful memory for canon or enjoy research, or a gift for characterization or dialogue, you may still have something to offer. Or maybe you are very attentive to detail and never miss a typo. Just be clear in your blurb what your strengths are and what they aren't and the authors can choose based on their needs.
slaymesoftly: (Default)
[personal profile] slaymesoftly
During the course of doing some beta and editing work, I’ve been reminded of something that it seems many authors don’t bother to do. Something that kind of boggles my mind. Proofread their own stuff! Good self-editing of both fanfic and original fiction is vitally important to all writers, whether your intended audience is a small group of readers who love your genre and pairing, or a much larger group of readers who will be reading your work because they think they will like it.

Behind the cut are some thoughts on the importance of self-editing, as well as some suggestions about doing it effectively.

Read more... )

Good stuff

Nov. 16th, 2012 05:29 pm
slaymesoftly: (Default)
[personal profile] slaymesoftly
Found this on FB and it is wonderful information, some of which I've heard before, but not all.

http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/writing-for-the-visually-impaired.aspx

I've been very negligent about keeping RRU on this site updated. My apologies to any of you who are only reading here. I'll try to get better!

Awesome

Jul. 20th, 2012 08:57 am
slaymesoftly: (Spikefanfic)
[personal profile] slaymesoftly
Found this on a Random House FB post:



Do you ever feel mentally sharper after reading high literature? Philip Davis, an English professor at the University of Liverpool, does–particularly after reading works by William Shakespeare. The way that the Bard structured lines–what Davis calls the “functional shift”–seems to prime the mind. Davis wanted to know if this was a scientifically verifiable phenomenon. So several years ago, he asked people to read lines while hooked up to electroencephalography (EEG) equipment:

But around each of those sentences of functional shift we also provided three counter-examples which were shown on screen to the experiment’s subjects in random order: all they had to do was press a button saying whether the sentence roughly made sense or not. Thus, below, A (“accompany”) is a sentence which is conventionally grammatical, makes simple sense, and acts as a control; B (“charcoal”) is grammatically odd, like a functional shift, but it makes no semantic sense in context; C (“incubate”) is grammatically correct but still semantically does not make sense; D (“companion”) is a Shakespearian functional shift from noun to verb, and is grammatically odd but does make sense:

A) I was not supposed to go there alone: you said you would accompany me.
B) I was not supposed to go there alone: you said you would charcoal me.
C) I was not supposed to go there alone: you said you would incubate me.
D) I was not supposed to go there alone: you said you would companion me.

What happened to our subjects’ brains when they read the critical words on screen in front of them?

According to the EEG, subjects had a greater comprehension of more complex lines once they had read a line featuring Shakespeare’s functional shift:

In other words, while the Shakespearian functional shift was semantically integrated with ease, it triggered a syntactic re-evaluation process likely to raise attention and give more weight to the sentence as a whole. Shakespeare is stretching us; he is opening up the possibility of further peaks, new potential pathways or developments. Our findings show how Shakespeare created dramatic effects by implicitly taking advantage of the relative independence–at the neural level–of semantics and syntax in sentence comprehension. It is as though he is a pianist using one hand to keep the background melody going, whilst simultaneously the other pushes towards ever more complex variations and syncopations.

http://www.neatorama.com/2012/07/15/reading-shakespeare-enhances-your-ability-to-think/
slaymesoftly: (pic#795869)
[personal profile] slaymesoftly
As I was copying the post from LJ, I realized there has not been any beta list set up on DW, so here we go. I'll start it off, but feel free to add to it if you want to be on it. If it won't let you do so, just post an entry giving your name, contact info, what your qualifications are and what you will or will not work on. I'll add you to the list. Let's try to get a current list of people willing to help newbie writers (or older ones who need a new beta).
Thanks!



Slaymesoftly: I have a long-standing offer to do one chapter for any author who has been turned down at an archive, or who wants to know what he/she needs to work before submitting. I'll make the corrections, provide the reasons (rule of punctuation or grammar) for the corrections, and make whatever other comments seem necessary. Sometimes, if I really like your story, I'll stick with you all the way through it (or until you get someone to work with you permanently), but all I'm willing to promise right now is one chapter so you will know where you stand.
slaymesoftly: (RRU)
[personal profile] slaymesoftly
So, here's a link to my journal where I made a post whining about a story I'd read that contained waaaaay too many adjectives (some used much too often) and waaaaay too many adverbs, often used inappropriately. The ensuing discussion contains a lot of good stuff, including writing suggestions and advice from some good writers. Rather than copy my words here, and have you miss the discussion stuff, I'm just going to link you to it. If you're an author, you may pick up something you should know that you've not though about before, and if you're a beta (as it seems fewer and fewer people are, BTW. I would really like to have a working list of people who are willing to beta, so I can pass the names on new authors) you will have something to which you can refer your author if/when she argues with you.

I'm serious about the beta stuff. Please take a look at the beta list on here and update, delete your profile, or add yourself if you aren't on it but would like to be.
slaymesoftly: (RRU)
[personal profile] slaymesoftly
So, here I am again. Finally taking the time to compile some interesting and informative things submitted by RRU members ([personal profile] petzipellepingo and [personal profile] shakatany specifically). In the interest of getting them all out there and not forgetting anything, I’ve put them all in one longish document. Behind the cut you will find three entries taken from a writing blog by Constance Hale, an entry by Ben Yagoda about common comma mistakes (try saying that three times fast), and one by Bryan Garner about retronyms (yes, it is a word).

Ms Hale’s entries are entertaining and informative. She does a good job of explaining the concepts being addressed and allows room for a little humor. Mr Yagoda’s in a bit dryer and not always as easy to “get”. However, he makes up for it by addressing the issues of comma splices (including the most common one I see in fanfic, which seems to be a hazard of dialogue interrupted by action) and by saying that the best way to know what the best punctuation would be for a sentence is to read it aloud. So much awkwardness could be avoided if authors did that more often. *sigh*

The last item is a link to a web site or blog that I don’t recall checking into, but it was in my RRU folder, so I presume someone gave it to me and suggested it could be useful.


Read more... )
Page generated Sep. 2nd, 2026 04:41 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios