Search options (Page 2 of 20)

Congratulations. Mind posting the link?

Kiss,
Gacela

Glad you're recovering. Let's be extra cautious. No precaution is enough to keep Covid-19 away from our lives.

Kiss,

Gacela

Well, if you wanna send me a signed copy, then I'll really appreciate that.

Kiss,
Gacela

By the way, the link in your Goodreads profile to Chronicles of Kwan I is not working. It takes one to an error message that the book is not available and I wanted to purchase it.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/15750290-kwan

Kiss
Gacela

Is this related to your story called Project L?

Kiss

Gacela

When you're listening, punctuation matters the most. Written language mimics the spoken language. When we talk, we pause. Sometimes we make short pauses, sometimes, long ones. Commas and full-stops perform the same function. A good automatic reader should be programmed to respect the punctuation, otherwise the story will make no sense.

The purpose of grammar is to standardise written language  and make it understandable, thus serving as a communication mean. Otherwise, written language would be impossible to understand. Both written and spoken language evolve, and that is right, but if any of them evolve too fast you end up with something that is no longer understandable. For practical purposes, a new language.

If people start writing the way they prefer, for example not using apostrophes, while it may be easy to recognise some words, it may be difficult to recognise others--unless everybody who speaks English accepts the change at once and starts writing in that way. This is almost impossible, because, unlike French, Portuguese, and Spanish, there is no international organisation, whose authority is widely accepted, ruling how the language should be written, recognising new trends, and communicating the new trends to every Spanish, French, or Portuguese speaker.

For example: all of you who have studied Spanish know this language uses graphical accents over vowels to indicate the strong syllable in a word,  like this: á, é í, ó, and ú. This is important because the meaning of a lot of words changes depending on the accented syllable. "Lastima" (emphasis on the "i") and "lástima" (emphasis on the "a") mean different things. "Lastima", means "it hurts", "lástima" means pity.

Recently, the Spanish Academy decided to eliminate a number of graphical accents in words where there is no possible confusion, thus simplifying the grammar. "Fué" means 2went", the strong vowel is the "e". But there's no possible confusion because there is no other word like that. So, after 2010,  "fue" is written without the graphical accent. Once the Academy published the new grammar rules, every Spanish speaker started writing these and the rest of the modified words without the graphical accent. Editors and publishers immediately adopted the new rule. Schools started teaching the new rule ipso-facto.

In English, this is not possible, for there is no "worldwide" authority. There are some authorities, like the Chicago Manual of Style, but to follow their mandates optional. Take the Oxford comma, there are critics and followers, but no rule. Brits write "recognise" and Americans "recognize", and both are considered right. English standardisation is poor and, with enough time, it may end up like Latin, giving birth to a number of new languages similar, but different, from the original one. Whether that is good or bad is still to be seen. It'll be good if the process fosters better communication, it'll be bad if it hinders communication.

Kiss,
Gacela

SPAM!

This is what I think:

From my perspective, there are four kind of prologues:
a) Personal
b) Academic.
c) Background.
d)Teasers.

a) Personal prologues: The author shares with the reader a personal moment, or the reason why she wrote the book, or the particular feelings the story raises for the author, etc.

b) Academic prologues. These are the prologues in which a recognised voice (such a celebrity of some kind, such as an actor, a known college dean, a politician, etc) introduces the book to readers, usually by praising its content. Sometimes, but not always, the prologue may focus on issues around the book such as the writer’s personal story and motivations. Or the story’s background. I.e., if the story is about WWII, the prologue on the European political situation during it.

c) Background prologues. These prologues provide background to the story. These are the ones I believe some other people in the Premium forum have indicated may be used as Chapter One or Chapter Zero. The Lord of the Rings has a large prologue from the author that is mostly background, and only because the Silmarillion hadn’t been published yet and Tolkien felt the need to update the reader on some Middle Earth details, unknown to the reader, that may hinder the reader’s ability to grasp the whole Middle Earth thingie.

IMHO, what makes this kind of prologues an actual prologue, and the reason why they can’t be turned into Chapter One, is because they provide background that can otherwise be provided within the story, but not at the beginning of it, or else, that can be omitted at all without damaging the story. If you cut The Lord of the Ring’s prologue, you can still read and enjoy the whole story, and grab what the author wanted to transmit, without losing anything.

d) Teasers: In these cases, the prologue is usually an extract—a scene—from a later chapter. This extract either actually exists, or is a scene otherwise not narrated but that took place between two scenes, or chapter, that ARE narrated. It may also be “Had I known…” type of prologue narrated by the MC at a point in time after the whole story has taken place. It vaguely discusses the bad consequences of whatever took place in the story, which might have been prevented by the MC “had she known…” The objective of this type of prologues is to grab the reader’s attention before she has even laid her eyes on page one.

Rachel: from your answer to Dirk, it’s my belief you’re writing a teaser. IMHO, just make sure the teaser is no so obscure it scares readers away rather than luring them to your story.

Kiss,
Gacela

Don't worry. We all understand. We've all been in your shoes. Take your time. We'll all be here when you can come back.
Kiss,
Gacela

Thanks, Rachel. This is most helpful. I still have a question from my experience reviewing your story back when it was titled Rhian the Nude. How can I tell humour from the actual plot? The story indeed seems a serious one. Good fantasy. Excellent world-building. Original characters (who would have thought of a lesbian princess who can't use clothes because of a curse?). I can certainly smell the occasional sarcasm and puns. However, my problem is when elaborate sarcastic or humorous scenes do get in the way of the plot. I can think of the scene when one of Rhianon's allies urinated the throne. I frowned upon that scene and made several comments, then you explained to me the sarcasm and the humour behind it.

It might be me. Maybe I'm too naïve and simpleminded to understand the fine, elaborated sarcasm. The fact is, I so disliked that scene, I couldn't enjoy Rhianon's great moment because this character urinated the throne and I was like "Ewwww!". Again, maybe smarter and more educated readers laugh out loud at that scene, its irony,  and its anti-climatic mood, but I couldn't. The same happens to me once and again with other scenes.

So, maybe this publisher who pointed out that the humour somehow interferes with the serious part wasn't totally wrong and there's a part of the audience who simply can't get it--on the other hand, you may not be writing for that part of the audience, so, who cares? Andy Kaufman comes to my mind. Some of his jokes were so elaborated only he understood them. Proof of this is when the majority of the audience voted for "Dump Andy" because they never understood the sarcasm behind his wrestling thing. His simple jokes, on the other hand, like the foreign man who appeared in Taxi, were acclaimed. Curiously, just as he never enjoyed working in Taxi, he never cared about that part of the audience who couldn't understand him, for he kept on with his personal humour until death crossed his path.

In the same order of ideas, you may prefer to keep the humour because it's your personal imprint and signature, at the risk of not being properly understood but, what the heck?

Kiss,

Gacela

And