Search options (Page 23 of 47)

Janet Taylor-Perry wrote:

vern wrote:

Pretty cool and eye-catching. (S)he must've had a good teacher. Not crazy about the wine glass depiction for Broken - it's not - but the art itself is still good. Take care. Vern

The wine glass is broken off the stem. The stem itself is on the spine with the unbroken wine glass in shadow on the back.
Read the first chapter and you'll see why the broken wine glass with the bullet and the red substance (wine or blood or a combination thereof) fits. Someone didn't get the blue eye on Lucky Thirteen. But blue eyes run throughout the story. And the covers do speak to the content of the story.

Christopher Chambers can be reached at cchambers@juroddesigns.com if anyone is interested in his work. Tell him I sent you.

I'm not saying a "broken" glass doesn't fit the story, just that the glass depicted isn't broken as seen and to me personally, it would fit even better with the title if it were actually broken where the observer could see it. Just an observation and personal view on my part and I may well be the only one who would see it that way on a store shelf. Good artwork regardless. Take care. Vern

Janet Taylor-Perry wrote:

Dill Carver wrote:

Creative use of punctuation?

http://img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tena … =f&l=f

Or is it just bad grammar on the bad grandma?

I see no use of punctuation here, save the apostrophe in I'm. What I see is a tattoo artist with an in inventive style of calligraphy. The "me" could easily be a place where the pen skipped.

Sorry Janet, it wasn't serious... as I mentioned, a cheap nonsensical vehicle£ to post my 'bad grammar, bad grandma' play on words is all.

Charles_F_Bell wrote:

Memphis Trace wrote:

Literary is one place where creative writers use the language for all it offers.

There is no informative or artistic merit in jumbling words together without context, whether provided by standards or intelligibly by an author's talent, likely both, to ascertain meaning.

A written work containing a single word:

what

must be in your opinion worthy of the Nobel Prize in literature because the author does no more than coordinate four letters.

Ah, but there's the rub. Elegance and efficiency arise from the ashes of context.

My first contribution to this discussion was to provide context wherein I met the challenge of showing the example— A woman without; her man is nothing.—was elegant, artistic, fraught with meaning, and powerfully punctuated. The context: If without is an adverb meaning outside, then using the semicolon is power punctuation and the sentence is wonderfully efficient. Within the context I'm thinking, it means: Minnie went somewhere with her girlfriends for a night out; Riley stayed home and can't even find the fixins for a sammich.

As I've said before, "You seem bent on limiting your word usage to situations not requiring context. Pick any word and you can make it ambiguous without context."

As far as a written work containing the single word what being worthy of a Nobel Prize, nothing in my argument remotely suggests that A woman without; her man is nothing. is noteworthy absent context.

Write a novel with the proper context for what to render it's appearance on the page as a denouement. a fully realized thought and not an ambiguity, and it could indeed be worthy of a Nobel Prize. Even if the letters were arranged to spell thaw.

Memphis Trace

JP suggested that I submit The Cat and her Ship, Chapter 3 as an example of meeting dialog. Those that wish can take a look at it and comment.

~Tom