Search options (Page 15 of 38)

indescribable

I won't confirm or deny the quality of your analysis, njc. I'll just thank you for helping me reach this next great summit as a writer: it is an honor to be abridged.

Describe a scribe.

To get to the other side!

Well, hello, Charles. Always nice to encounter you in one of these threads. Let's see what we have today. Ah! A debate about the relevance of editors before submitting in the middle of a discussion on whether or not a yearly subscription to Chicago is worth the money.

At first glance your interruption appears to have an intellectual seed: I have said something in my post which you read as an implication that I believe an editor is necessary before submitting, and that an editor knows better about stylistic choices than a "competent" author. You disagree.

If your goal was simply to spotlight this topic as one worthy of discussion, you would have calmly presented your opinion on the matter and put it up for healthy discussion. I'm sure people would have joined in on such a thread, as it is relevant to our field here at the site, and there are surely diverging opinions. You might have referenced your interpretation of my post and stated an opposing position, sticking to facts and your own view. Instead, you make the debate about what I think, rather than the topic itself. You cast yourself as the defender of the rights of scribes, and cast me as some sort of opponent who demands an editor be hired, leaping from your interpretation of my post to a demand for its justification. This suggests that either a) you give my opinion a great deal of weight and cannot possibly rest until you know my thoughts on the relevance of editors before submitting, or that b) your actual goal when you posted above had nothing to do with a rational dissection of the relevance of an editor before submitting, and everything to do with establishing your power in a combative moment fabricated from thin air.

Listen, Charles. It isn't that I don't find the topic potentially constructive, but past conversations with you have proven that we have opposing goals in a discussion. I consider you to be combative and illogical. I don't see this conversation going anywhere sensible, and I can see already that your goal here is merely to nail down someone (ANYONE) to a viewpoint you hold so that you can establish intellectual dominance and feel again the surge of power that is the trademark of the forum troll.

I have no wish to continue being dragged into your strange worldview just to serve as the catalyst to your weekly energy boost. If you need self-confidence, seek a therapist. If you want to discuss writing, try being open-minded and presenting your ideas with a little humility.

Please take my silence in response to any future efforts to engage me in strange debate as evidence that I continue to doubt your maturation as an intellect, and that I consider any conversation with you a waste of my time. You seem to like collecting my opinions, and that's certainly one to bat about divinely.

With best wishes for your writing. Corra

MLA and APA are for academic writing, yes? Chicago and the AP Style book are valid choices for fiction. I believe AP is more referenced by journalists, while Chicago tends to be the choice for publishing houses who take on fiction (I think). My personal feeling is that matters of style at the micro level are mostly for the final round of edits, & can be handled by one's editor. (I think most publishing houses have their own preferred style book, so some of these edits would be moot until right before publication anyway.)

The most important thing in early drafts is probably just to be consistent.

Dirk, have you thought about buying the latest print version of Chicago rather than going for an online subscription? I'm not sure if that fits your goals at this point, but unless you need the latest updates to Chicago as they're developed, I don't see the advantage of a yearly subscription over a print version? Something to think about, anyway. Probably the online version is worth your money if you want to be up to date constantly. That seems like something a journalist or a professional writer who expects to be published pretty consistently might need -- to stay relevant. It seems like the print version would work (even an early version) until the final round of edits. And like I said, a lot of the style details would be handled in partnership with your editor. And you could probably borrow the latest Chicago from the library while you're editing.

Only my thoughts...

“Everything about her was warm and soft and scented; even the stains of her grief became her as raindrops do the beaten rose.” - Edith Wharton, The House of Mirth.

Vivien x

Oh, I'm sorry! I can see that now. I hadn't noticed the impression of buildings in the first, even after studying it for a few minutes! I did notice a subtle geometric impression in the background of the first, at the top. I didn't realize they were meant to be buildings. It might be an issue of how large the cover is on my screen. To me the impression of buildings in the first looks like geometric pixels which my brain simply tuned out as background. I assumed they were meant as pattern.

Well, obviously I like my version of simplicity in the top half of cover #1 but if you want to keep the buildings in it (which could be excellent), I do think adding some more definition to the buildings would make them more clearly buildings. (I'd) still keep them really subtle and subliminal. Maybe not quite so subtle, ha ha! Now that I realize they are meant to be buildings in #1, I like the contrast between the mountains (nature) and the buildings (industry/civilization). It reminds me of a novel I read once (Volcano by Shusaku Endo.)

I like the idea of making the color on the first more antique. But I also like it as it is -- with the rich yellow.

And like I said -- I like the snowy white ones too, with the woman. They're all good. I think the subway/Shinkansen would be/is too much. I'd remove the train or Shinkansen altogether. I like what you say about the woman's face bridging the image. I feel like having the train in there takes away from that subtle mystery of the woman, the buildings, the snowy mountains. The train doesn't really add much, imho, and threatens to appear cut and pasted. The rest has a symmetry, while the train looks pasted in.

An entirely biased opinion based on personal preference. Also bearing in mind I have no idea what the novel is about...

This response stinks of a pathetic scramble to maintain your intellectual integrity in this thread without having to reveal that you have no source -- you are simply sharing your opinion. No one with an ounce of intelligence would believe that you have sources you're simply not sharing because you find the question proof of ignorance. You cite your sources when you have them -- readily, arrogantly, and expediently. You're not doing so in this case because you've been caught without a source. You know that, and you think that throwing out dim-witted insults and then spewing intellectual piety will distract people from your folly. No one is distracted.

Intellectual integrity means that if you make a claim and it's wholly opinion, you say so. If you're making a claim based on expert research or opinion, you cite your sources. Then everyone within the conversation can have a balanced view of the picture and develop their own conclusions. Ignorance is holing up in your moron cave and claiming that because you believe something, though you have absolutely no sources to back up your claim, everyone who disagrees is ignorant. And then calling said people names, like a twelve year old. Which is sadly the only source you've cited in this thread to date. And remarkably, that source is, as ever, you.

Good to see that you realize you conduct your intellectual conversations from a childish perspective though. That's the first step!

P.R.O.J.E.C.T.I.N.G.

I did a little research, & think I found the original source. Hope this helps.

I got them all right except #6. But we did drink it before we realized... They both [had looked] (look) right to me!

“If I had a brother in jail and one in Georgia, I'd try to bust the one out of Georgia first.” —Charles Frazier