oldslabsides wrote: 
Do it.

 oldslabsides wrote: 
Yes.  It is time.

Okay, this idea had been rolling around my head long enough.  Maybe it's time I started writing it down.

My novel-in-progress is going to get a major overhaul.

I need to switch some characters around and add some things to their lives that I know personally (because write about what you know, right?). Like dementia. And Multiple System Atrophy. These are compelling things that will grab readers more deeply...and I can tell them from a firsthand POV.
But what a challenge. Okay, here goes....

 Xeric wrote: 

Well, they are different methods of communication, as is music too, of course.  Certain writers are often too wordy for my tastes as well: Pardon my apparent blasphemy, but even Charles Dickens sometimes seemed like he took three paragraphs to describe something as minor as a visitor's ascot, when one or two sentences could have done the job.
My artwork has always been primarily depictive, with occasional forays into more abstractly non-depictive work, but for me the work is frequently "narrative" in nature.  My being a trained and adept draftsman has often made the depictive work my personal vocabulary.

 sirdroseph wrote: 



I love and have encouraged dot's poetry here—I think it's actually quite good.

Poetry, though . . . that's its own ball of wax.

Interesting, Proclivities. I, too, prefer art that does something more than perfect representation of "reality." Then again, I do like it to get very, very close (that is, I don't much care for—-even if I'm impressed by the technical skill of—"photorealism.") And yet I'd insist on perfect grammar. Interesting.

Actually a good local example is dotman, if dotman used perfect grammar his poems would lose much of their power. Viva freedom of expression!

 Xeric wrote: 

 sirdroseph wrote: 
I personally prefer correct grammar, especially if I'm the one doing the writing.  However,  I have read and enjoyed many works which were not written in perfect grammar.  The 'message' is ultimately the most important part of literature and visual art as well, but I tend to have a hard time going through poorly written material after a while - the same as how I lack patience for poorly executed or composed artwork (unless that is the specific intent).  In terms of visual art though, I find ultra-technical genres like photo-realism to be largely soulless and unengaging - though perhaps that is part of the intent from those artists.  By the same token, I find some literary works to be over-written.
I have always found it interesting that two of the finest (relatively modern) writers of English prose - Joseph Conrad and Vladimir Nabokov - did not learn English until later in life.

 Xeric wrote: 

I understand, but the way you phrased it initially made your meaning sound a little condescending so perhaps perfect grammar isn't everything.

Let me put that another way.

I don't want you to "make out" your version of my meaning. I want you to read my meaning exactly. Grammar helps to ensure that happening.

 sirdroseph wrote: 


You miss my point entirely, which may well be my bad (to use a term I loathe).

Yes, you can make out SOME meaning, of course. If I want you to get the particular meaning *I* was hoping you'd get, then I'll use the rules of grammar and usage and rhetoric to try to see that that happens.

Or let me turn that around: if you (generically speaking) want me to take a particular meaning (and to take you seriously), you'll make an effort to use the language according to established convention. If you (again, generically, not you sirdroseph specifically) can't be bothered to make that effort (the point of "effort" being that perfection is not required), I'll be oh so disinclined to take you seriously.

 Xeric wrote: 

Well, good for you! However, it is rare that I cannot make out the meaning regardless of the technical precision of the grammar. If you have to have your language that precise to understand the meaning than I suppose perfect grammar is what you require and demand. Personally, I have more important things to worry about than the       technical      precision      of       every      word.  I am just a simple commoner tryin to get through the day.

 JrzyTmata wrote: 
My former supervisor at the spa in SB actually told me, "It's Sunday morning, and people are still spa-ing before they go back to LA."

 sirdroseph wrote: 



" . . . the message" and, *especially*, "the style of the message" ARE CONVEYED BY GRAMMAR.

I have said for many years that I value my mastery of grammar (and usage, etc.) because it lets me force you to read my words the way I want them read. Those rules are the writer's means of control. A few masters (among whom I do not, personally, rank Kerouac) can bend the rules in such a way that you, the reader, still choose or are forced to get the intended meaning (and nuance, and etc.), but damned few. The rest of us either master the rules or risk spouting gibberish.

Also: internet forums are not formal. They are *public*, and that's where I'd draw the line. If U wnt 2 right lk a klown in ur privit jrnl, have at it. If you want me to read it, and to read it was you meant it read, step up to the plate.

 AliGator wrote: 
I'm with you on gifting. I hate that word.

 sirdroseph wrote: 
Writers who take grammatical liberties are a whole other ball of wax.

 winter wrote: 
Hi, winter!   I'm doing it again this year.  I'm up to 38,343 words, but I'm hoping to get more done today.  Last year, I got so disgusted with the story I was writing that I almost didn't finish.  Of course, the point is quantity, not quality, so once I reminded myself of that, it got easier. I just let the blithering idiot in me take over the keyboard and have some fun.

Keep at it - you'll get there! 

 RockRelic wrote: 

Well, you probably do not like Jack Kerouac. That is fine, but I do and think the beauty or power of the description far outweighs the grammatical correctness of the writing. To me, in the context of entertainment writing for others; i.e. novels, short stories and so forth, grammar is almost irrelevant, the message and style of the message is what is important. However, in formal publications, columns and so forth, I agree, grammar should be correct. My 2.

Edit: forums do not qualify as formal publications!

 RockRelic wrote: 
Lots of people seem to not care about spelling, grammar, and punctuation, and it also seems they have the attitude that "you know what I meant to say, so it doesn't matter." It grates on those of us who like precision in language. And I'm not a prescriptivist; I let some things slide. (The verbing of nouns? Let's get over it. Except for "gifting" — I haaaate that.)

I don't think we can blame either text messaging or the teachers. Let's blame it on apathy.

Congrats to your son on his CAPES, and best of luck to him.

 winter wrote: 


And the be hinder you get, the more I see you HERE!