Search options (Page 36 of 43)

A piece of commercial writing is reviewed objectively by individuals who then subjectively express their individual opinions about it for the purpose of a discussion (as you do). Why are the opinions that don't conform to your own, labelled sneering? Are you the ultimate authority upon the official quality of prose? It is totally okay that you liked it; that's the point of the discussion. The opinions that are pro or con are valued equally. Nobody is going to call you a shallow minded cheerleader or some such for having an opinion of your own, but why be aggressive and attack other legitimate points of view as sneering? It comes across as if you hold any opinion other than your own in contempt?

There is a broad span of personal taste, opinion and preference when it comes to any art form or media product. Can this community not hold an open minded discussion upon literature and the art or writing within the bounds of respect, understanding and civil minded debate? Where is the professionalism and camaraderie? Why must aggression be injected and points be made with snarky digs at people with opposing views? That kind of behaviour discourages others from entering into a conversation because it is not friendly and not conducive to an open minded community.

What is 'proper' tragedy to a masochist and a martyr? Any drama or discomfort will do.

See, now you have been infected with the toothpick chewin' lingo of the Novel in question.

it features the words 'get' 'gets' and 'got' x10,000

...but it achieves its objective.

Maybe there's hope for Tess, after all.

Nor do I, Agent corra. Nor do I.

So there is hope for us all, after all! And there I was thinking you had to get naked with an Agent.

If you are using the Chrome browser in Windows 10 you can hold down the [Ctrl]+[Alt] keys and triple tap on the '$' key then the '#' key whilst the mouse pointer has focus upon the 'Post Reply' text; then a 'Closed' thread is reopened.

("Let's eat grandma" vs "Let's eat, grandma").

As a standalone phrase this looks conclusive, but within the context of a full conversation or dialogue the erroneous (or completely and utterly out of context) meaning is hardly likely to be mistaken for the inherent meaning.

Can you read this?

Have you read that? 

Did you mix those meanings up? Do we need to write...

Can you reed this?

Have you red that? 

How about;

The wind filled the sail and the boat lurched forward.

He bent to wind the clock.

or

The wind blew the leaves from the trees.

He has to wind the clock before he leaves for work..

I'd be surprised if anyone gathered the wrong meanings from these  sentences. Context is key. If the context is clear then punctuation is more or less redundant because your brain takes over.

Commas are important, I'm just saying that understanding "Let's eat, grandma" depends more upon the context than the punctuation.

The Taliban will be discharging their AK-47's into the air in support of your views. For that I commend you. The more ammunition they expend harmlessly, the better IMO.

Feminists?

I am born of one, married another and sired two more.

Whilst your statement provides me with a niggling inclination that you might be right, I shall put it to them today for the authoritative view.

quote=corra]

Wasn't it Leonard Woolf who when asked, 'How many feminists does it take to change a light bulb? replied, "None, feminists can't change anything."

...and that's why his wife had, "change this you bastard" inscribed upon his headstone?

If I were to describe 'Farewell to arms' and 'the road' in a single sentence each, I'd say that 'Love shines through.' of one where 'Desperation shines through' in the other. I found both of them very moving.