|
|
Currently no members online:)
You are an anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here |
We have 30 guests online !
|
|
|
|
|
Mistress Manners: Revision |
Posted by
callei on Saturday, July 12, 2003 - 04:10 AM PST
What we have here is an example. Some people try and try and try to rewrite things in an attempt to get me to post them. I give feedback when asked (and sometimes when I am not asked too!). I tried to help this author rework this piece. It didn't help, the article just got longer and less interesting, not matter what I said or what they did. I finally handed it to someone else and said "Can you find the story?". She decided to give it a try and that is what you can read under revisions.
I am making both public so that others can use her learning curve, sort of like a group date or something. At least you can all bond over hating me and thinking I don't know good writing when I see it. I would like help getting across to the author that "Yee Olde English"(1) is a waste of effort, that one should have some small grasp on what a word means before you use it (2), and that prepositions and adverbs aren't confetti (3). I'm not even going to mention the defused and disparate time sense in the so-called verb usage. Split infinitives are not cool. And just for a parting shot, this is a poetry free arena (4). If you want to post poetry, then go to the poetry shooting gallery and put it there. I can only be so nice for so long. Please, please, please put DOWN the thesaurus, pick up the dictionary, and try to learn how to write normally before you try to write fancifully. Goodbye, Merdael Oh Merdael, how (3) I still (3) stand over your grave every Christmas night (1). I still recall the times you held deep pride (2), glutted to (3) your demise (2), had unmatched lust (2), carried your problems onto (3) other people (2), usurped businesses from others (2), felt insecure as the people around you were merry (1), and struck those who blew your fuse (2). These memories will forever (3) be past (1), but will forever (3) cross my mind (1). Have you not forgotten me (1), the one you ever so (3) loathed at (1) (3)? Yes, I do remember the first day we met; the day that rain threatened to drop (1) on the streets of Brooklyn. I was middle-class (2) and you were an aristocrat (2), one that (3) was filled with so much pride (1). On (3) that day, you demanded, "Clean off (3) the mud from my shoes, it seems you are muddy enough!" I looked at the mud on your feet, then up to you, smiling at the insecurity I saw in your eyes. You grew enraged with my insubordinate (2) behavior, causing you to scream, "Filthy wench (1) (2), out of my site you stand!" (1) (2) (3) I chuckled and walked pass your pompous form. The second day, I watched you in the shadows of the café (1). Predictably, you pushed people away (3) from your path (2) and threatened them with your resources and wrath. Sitting down, you demanded some (3) shrimp scampi with spaghetti, but the café had none. Unexpectedly (2), you screamed at the manager, insulting him in his café. When you finished mocking (2) the manager of the cafe, you spitted (2) in his face and proudly away. (3) On the third day, you walked by my humble abode (1). The first person you ever (3) set eyes was on my daughter (1), one who was merely (3) sixteen winters old (1). But you cared not (1)" you wanted to feel her untouched bosom (1). I stepped in (3) between you and her to protect her from your touch and asked you kindly to leave my property. However (3), being the prideful man you were, you refused to do so. I repeated myself a bit harsher (2), but instead (2) (3) you pulled out a gun. Then (3) you shot my house and windows and left my daughter and I in ruin (1) (2). I frowned and embraced (2) her as you walked away (3). When the fourth day came by (3), I was in the park, reading my book. You? Well, you were walking in the park, making your men fan you as you made sweat (1) (2). Utters (2) were heard (1), so I listened intently (2)(3) as (3) I heard one of your men complain, "Master, may I please take a break now? I been fanning you for hours!" But of course (1) (3), you would not fan yourself " you felt above it. My eyes widened as you took a knife and slit his throat and ended his life. You left his corpse instantly (2), being too proud to take responsibility. I frowned and closed my book, standing and walking away to look for help. What in the Heavens or Hells has lead to this? Four days have passed since you spitted (2) on the grounds of the café. Opening a newspaper article (2), I read about you buying the land the café was set upon (1) (3). Not only did you do that (3); you ordered the café to be torn up (3). This made me wonder if this was done by (3) a grudge (2). I found you quite (3) the megalomaniac, but I did little (3) to budge (2). It has been days, but you still (3) lusted for my daughter you desired to take her virginity (2). < As a side note here, most people that have lovers are not virgins since sex is so often part of being lovers, as compared to being in love, or dating or having a crush on someone etc.> That day (2), my daughter came home in tears and told me of (3)the pain she could not bare (1); she told me that her lover (2) was dead and told me he was shot in the head. She described the stranger (2), described him with a profile that fitted (2) you (1). While your actions tampered (2) with my patience (2), I knew that I could not prove to the proper authorities that the murderer was you. I came home from my daily routine one day to see my walls decorated in blood. With (3) further observation (2), I found the corpse of my daughter, naked and covered in blood. What she did to deserve such a fate (1)(2)(3)? Alas (3), I did not know (1), but I did take note of the knife in her violated body; I recognized it to be (3)(well sort of) the one you used to kill your servant. Tears flooded my eyes; my hate for you rose (1) (2)! Weeks have passed since I buried my daughter. This night, however, you were with a trusted acquaintance (2). I watched in (3) a distance as you walked in an alley with him. You both disappeared from the naked eye (1). It was less than two minutes before I heard a gun shot that night, which made me wondered (2) where your shadows (2) had lead (ok I give in what is it with past tense becoming present tense mid sentence?) you that time. The man walked out of the alley and left the sheriff to investigate the events of that night. Worry not, dear Merdael, I no longer hold wrath (2) for you (1). You'd like that too much, wouldn't you? Instead, I walk to your grave every Christmas night to remind you of your tragic (2) days and nights. Are you suffering, Merdael? Oh, I know you are suffering! After all, you paid (2) your due (1)(2), if not still paying for it now. I part (2) now and leave you at rest (1); I think I gave you plenty of company tonight. Just remember that things come back in time. Goodbye, Merdael. NOTE: Hope this cleaned up the previous grammar errors that I had. If not, tell me what I'm doing wrong, heh. Thanks. Revision This revision, attempted by a brave member who shall remain anonymous, more clearly shows the story. Such as it is. It does clean out most of the poe-esque language attempts, the more bizarre verb tense issues, and gives a little dignity to the main character. But nothing can help the actual plot. Oh, Merdael, I still stand over your grave every Christmas night. I still recall your pride and your unmatched desires. You infected others with your troubles, devoured businesses, and violently displayed your wrath. These memories will always plague my mind. Have you forgotten me? Rain threatened the streets of Brooklyn the day we first met. You were so arrogant; I expected nothing else when passing a member of the middle class like me. You demanded something of me, however, as you passed by: "Clean off the mud from my shoes, it seems you could use some more!" I looked at the mud on your feet before meeting your eyes and smiling at the insecurity I saw. Enraged, you spat "Filthy wench, out of my sight!" as I chuckled and walked past. The second day, I watched you in the shadows of the café. Predictably, you pushed people away and threatened them with your resources. As you sat you demanded some shrimp scampi with spaghetti, but they were out of shrimp. You screamed at the manager, insulting him in his café. When you finished you spat in his face and proudly walked away. On the third day you walked by my humble abode and first saw my daughter. She had only seen sixteen winters, but you cared not; you wanted to feel her untouched bosom. Savoring the delicate meeting of flesh and bone, your insatiable eyes devoured her every curve. Of course I intervened: I needed to protect my daughter from men such as yourself. I asked you kindly to leave my property. However, being the prideful man you were, you refused. I repeated myself, more sternly this time. Instead you drew a gun and shot the windows out of my home, leaving my daughter and I in ruin. I could do nothing but frown and embrace her as you left. When the fourth day came I was in the park reading a book. You were taking a stroll in that same park, making your servants fan you as you made sweat. I listened intently as I heard one of them complain "Master, may I please take a break now" I been fanning you for hours!" But of course, you would not deign to fan yourself. My eyes widened as I saw the knife. You then slit his throat then left his corpse in disdain, as if the site of your own work was beneath notice. I scowled and closed my book, walking away to look for help. What in the Heavens or Hells has lead to this? Four days have passed since you spat on the grounds of the café. Opening a newspaper, I read that you bought the land and ordered the café demolished. Was this the fruition of some petty grudge? I knew you were a megalomaniac, and though it offended me I did nothing. And you still desired my daughter. That day, she came home in tears and told me her love had been shot in the head. The person she described as the murderer could only have been you. I knew that I could do nothing although the pain was more than my daughter could bear. A few days later I came home to see blood on my walls and my daughter lying naked on the floor. What did she do to deserve such a fate? The knife in her violated body was the same one used to kill your servant. Tears flooded my eyes and pain wracked my body. For all of my suffering I could only hate you more. Weeks have passed since I buried my daughter. That night, however, you were with a trusted acquaintance and I watched in a distance as you walked down an alley with him. It was less than two minutes before I heard a shot ring. Where your shadows had lead you this time? The man walked out of the alley and left the remains. Worry not, dear Merdael: the wrath I held for you has since calmed. Wouldn't you love to hear that I hated you? Instead, I walk to your grave every Christmas night to remind you. Are you suffering, Merdael? Oh, I know you are suffering! After all, you know your deeds, and pay for them now. I am leaving now; I think I gave you enough company tonight. Just remember that things come back in time. Goodbye, Merdael. Please comment on the plot and the issues that you personally see in the structure and form of the story. Let this be a lesson to us all.
|
|
| |
|
|
Average Rating : 3.0
Total ratings : 4
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revision | Login/Create an account | 15 Comments |
| Comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content. |
Re: Revision
by feralucce on Jul 12, 2003 - 08:25 AM
(User info | Send a Message)
http://feralucce.vibechild.com
|
the revision...is impressive... I could make neither heads nor tales of the original, and the revision made it undnedrstandable...
it is an interesting concept... a letter to the dead... but I am confused on two points... why write a letter to the dead, when a monologue or soliloquy would have possibly been more effective?
and 2... am I mistaken or is there a reference to necrophelia right there at the end?
Feral
P.S. the original madee my eyes bleed
|
Re: Revision
by Shade (Shade@Gothcult.com)
on Jul 12, 2003 - 10:19 AM
(User info | Send a Message)
http://www.hotelshade.com
|
Just a quick note: Callei is the tireless editor on this one and the revisor can remain nameless, I just ended up posting this one under my name by accident when Callei's computer went haywire at the last minute.
|
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Revision
by Meranda_Jade (Meranda@mymind.com)
on Jul 12, 2003 - 02:04 PM
(User info | Send a Message)
|
I think the brave person who tried to revise this, may have been trying too hard. I think that much of the original meaning of the story was lost in the process.
First of all, I think it was meant to be in the style of an old Victorian novel. With this in mind, flowery prose is actually a necessity. I think the author did very well at portraying this style, though there were still a few glaring grammar and punctuation mistakes. Also, the parts that were awkward were cleaned up a bit, my apologies to the author if the intent was misrepresented. I hope this makes things more clear to all who read it.
Goodbye, Merdael Oh Merdael, I still stand over your grave every Christmas night. I still recall the times you held deeply to your pride, glutted yourself to no end, lusted insatiably, thrust your problems onto others, usurped businesses, felt insecure as the people around you were merry, and struck those who ignited your fuse. These memories will forever be in the past, but will forever cross my mind. Have you forgotten me, the one you loathed so much? Yes, I do remember the first day we met; the day that rain threatened to fall on the streets of Brooklyn. I was middle-class and you were an aristocrat, filled with so much pride. On that day you demanded, "Clean the mud from my shoes, it seems you are muddy enough!" I looked at the mud on your feet, then up to you, smiling at the insecurity I saw in your eyes. You grew enraged with my insubordinate behavior, causing you to scream, "Filthy wench, get out of my sight!" I chuckled and walked past your pompous form. The second day, I watched you in the shadows of the café. Predictably, you pushed people out of your path and threatened them with your wealth and wrath. Sitting down, you demanded some shrimp scampi with spaghetti, but the café had none. You screamed at the manager, insulting him in his café. When you finished mocking the manager of the cafe, you spat in his face and proudly walked away. On the third day, you walked by my humble abode. The first person you set eyes on was my daughter, who was merely sixteen winters old, but you cared not. You wanted to feel her untouched bosom. I stepped between you and her to protect her from your touch and asked you kindly to leave my property. However, being the prideful man you were, you refused to do so. I repeated myself a bit more harshly, but you pulled out a gun. You shot my house and windows and left my daughter and I in ruins. I frowned and embraced her as you walked away. When the fourth day came I was in the park, reading my book. You were walking in the park, making your men fan you as you perspired . I listened intently as I heard one of your men complain, "Master, may I please take a break now? I have been fanning you for hours!" Of course, you would not fan yourself; you felt you were above it. My eyes widened as you took a knife and slit his throat and ended his life. You left his corpse, too proud to take responsibility. I frowned and closed my book, and walked away to look for help. What in the Heavens or Hells has led to this? Four days have passed since you spat on the ground in the café. Opening a newspaper, I read that you bought the land upon which the café stood. Not only did you do this, you ordered the café to be torn down. This made me wonder if this was done to satisfy a grudge. I found you to be quite the megalomaniac, but I did nothing. It had been days, but you still lusted for my daughter; you desired to take her virginity . < As a side note here, during the time period in which I suspect this is set, a "lover" was one who was paying court to you. You did not have sex with them, thus could be a virgin. The same thing goes for the term "making love". It did not mean sex, it meant wooing.> That day, my daughter came home in tears and told me of the pain that she could not bear. She told me that her lover had been killed; he had been shot in the
Read the rest of this comment...
|
Re: Revision by Meranda_Jade (Meranda@mymind.com) on Jul 12, 2003 - 02:12 PM (User info | Send a Message) | Now, what I think the author meant to tell in this story:
There is a woman, a servant of a dead aristocrat, standing at his grave. As she worked for him, she saw many of his horrible deeds, and had some contempt for him. He knew she was contemptuous of him, and it made him angry. He went to her living quarters where she lived with her daughter. He sought to take his revenge on the woman by assaulting her daughter. One day, she saw him get his just reward from a man he was having shady dealings with. She goes once a year to gloat over his grave.
It makes sense. The story could use some development, and if worked with some more, could made longer with more detail. I think it's a good story in the making. |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Revision by callei on Jul 13, 2003 - 06:31 AM (User info | Send a Message) http:// | Just a few thoughts here: Brookland was never like that, a place where "Aristocrats" lived and played. <a href="http://www.eagle2.american.edu/~dc6367a/brooklandpage.htm"> a bit of history </a>. If one is trying to write a period peice, one shouldn't use modern slang. and as a side note to your side note, lover still often meant "person that you are doinking" in America, but not in Brittan. And we are talking about America here, i think. After all The rates of declared out-of-wedlock pregnancy for white women were the same in 1850 as they were in 1970. Americans wed earlier, and often already with child, than thier British counter-parts in the "Victorian" times. I know there is a romantic perception that people stayed virgins until they married at 25-30 years old and this was sort of true for some segments of the population. In genral though, Americans have, and always have had, more non-married sex at an earlier age that any other "Western" country.
And the fact that you re-wrote it well enough to be almost engaging ( barring the weird and wrong word usages) just speaks of your skill as a writer, not at the value of the notes that you used. |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Revision by Meranda_Jade (Meranda@mymind.com) on Jul 13, 2003 - 07:47 AM (User info | Send a Message) | Where are you getting Brookland? It says Brooklyn, which is in New York. As far as aristocracy in Victorian New York goes, watch the movie "The Age of Innocence". It's based on a true story, and as far as I know is historically accurate. I've read enough Victorian novels and watched enough movies based on the time period to know the meaning of the term "lover" as it was back then. One of my favorite time periods, actually. I do know that especially in the lower classes, virginity wasn't taken as seriously as in the upper classes, and the middle classes tried to emulate the upper classes, thus I suspect the daughter in the story was a virgin, as it was stated. Instead of picking on the historical accurracy, or whether or not a word was used in context, let's keep things where they were in the beginning. Punctuation, grammar, flowery word usage (which I still insist belongs in a story of this nature). Once the punctuation and grammar was cleaned up, it turned out to be a nice story. All I did was edit it. I did not rewrite it, as the person who tried before did. It kept the author's original flavor of the story. Sure, it needs work. It was probably written by a young person, who needs to get a punctuation/grammar guide, or a writing guide. I've actually read things that got posted that gave me headaches from bad tense usage, that were no better than this before it got edited. I don't mean in the mulit-posts, either. I'm not attacking anyone here, I just think this one wasn't all that bad, and I personally have nothing against someone writing with a style that includes flowery speech, if the style of the story demands it. |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Revision by callei on Jul 14, 2003 - 08:54 AM (User info | Send a Message) http:// | I got brookland from misspelling Brooklyn in the google search thingy. ALtho the history of Brooklyn NY is very simiar in that it wasnt where the US "Aristocracy" lived or vacationed. As for "The Age of Innocence", do you mean the recent movie with Wyona Ryder? that was based on a work of fiction and i have heard (having not watched it) that it has, as is usual, much added to it that was not in the original work. I cannot speak to its historical accuracy at all, tho the book was based on exageration of personal experiences.
And when taslking about America in the 1830-1890s you can't really use the word "Victorian" (1837-1901) with any real meaning. The Victorian Era happening in England, not in New England. In New England we were fighting about slaves rights, the President being shot, the civil war, and reconstruction. Let's not forget Revivalism that was influencing the newspapers, stages and sitting rooms of the day. The two nations were experiencing very differnt histories.
To place "Aristocracy", in the worst german and british sense, in New York is bizarre and stretches the bounds of reality. If this was meant to be a story placed in an alternate reality where America didnt "win" the revolutionary war ( a war i might add that ended a mere 50 years before the start of the Victorian Era), the author could have said something to indicate that.
a few other things: Servants usually lived in the same house as those that they served. The middle class was not composed of servants, rather of merchants and clerks. Servants came from the lower classes and usually started in service at an early age. Indentured Servatude had died out by about the 1800's (tho there were cases into the 1820's) Virginity was and is a very different concept in Europe and America. This was the 3rd or 4th re-write of this article.
And perhaps between my notes, and two re-writes, this author will see what i was talking about in my long and rambling emails to them and perhaps learn something about how a story can be shaped or mishaped by a few errors or word choices.
|
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Revision by Meranda_Jade (Meranda@mymind.com) on Jul 14, 2003 - 09:16 AM (User info | Send a Message) | I'm not going to argue with you about American and English history here. Or, for that matter, the literary styles of the age which is in question. I know what I know, and you know what you know, and we have differing opinions based on what each of us knows. I do not feel the need to prove myself right here, or for that matter, prove you wrong.
I do agree that between this posting and the rewrites that the author probably has a better idea of how story shaping and grammar and word usage can be employed to get an article posted. That was the subject in question in the first place, and I think it has been resolved satisfactorily. |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Revision by callei on Jul 14, 2003 - 09:20 AM (User info | Send a Message) http:// | that is why i said "let this be a lesson to us all" since we all need some help, another set of eyes, a different vocabulary, to help us with our writting from time to time.
|
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Revision by feralucce on Jul 14, 2003 - 09:56 AM (User info | Send a Message) http://feralucce.vibechild.com | It is not the slowery speech that I am opposed to... it is the impropper use of it when it is warranted... I tend towards leniency considering this peiece was written by someone who has english as their second language...
Feral |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Revision
by Squire-of-Gothos (Brian0049@hotmail.com)
on Jul 13, 2003 - 12:01 PM
(User info | Send a Message)
http://
|
Victorian style or not, flowery prose are awfully nifty, but mostly when used properly. I'd love to hear a story that sounded like a computer manual a lot more than one that sounded like someone took a big list of "pretty" words they saw in an Edgar Allen Poe story, and played madlibs with them in some contrived story of theirs. Not that there was really anything wrong with the story, once the revision was done, it was quite an enjoyable read, and had the original author had the chance or the know how, I'm sure it could have been just as good, if not better. But the point remains the same: Sometimes, in a literary sense, people on this site can get too big for their britches. Then again, better to have braved the storm. After all, who am I to speak?
|
Re: Revision
by Monolycus on Jul 13, 2003 - 02:51 PM
(User info | Send a Message)
|
I'll get sniped for saying so, but I didn't think the initial version was all that unforgivably bad and I don't think the revision is faithful in content to the original. The original version was a little forced, but no more so than many pieces from authors still searching for their voice. I saw a few spelling and grammatical errors in it, but I also saw many of them in both the revision and the subsequent critiques (some of which were absolutely abominable, but I will draw enough fire without pointing them out specifically). I don't think this was a bad attempt.
It wasn't my understanding that we were supposed to adopt a uniform writing style and discourage experimentation here. If flowery and faux-archaic language are now literary sins, then I have two articles of my own floating around out there that should never have passed muster.
~M.
|
Re: Revision by Sticupus (sticupus@hotmail.com) on Jul 14, 2003 - 01:41 PM (User info | Send a Message) http://www.obolisk.com | I also do not agree that the post is "unforgivably bad", however it simply doesn't make the grade. It's alright, just probably not appropriate to post as is. A few grammatical and spelling mistakes are alright too, as many accidentally make their evil little ways into posts via human error.
It is different with this post though. You are not taking into account how many times this has been submitted, and how many times the editors have asked for revisions on it. Sometimes mistakes cannot be helped, because if a person makes a writing error, they probably won't pick up on it. There is a solution that wasn't taken into action in this case: have another well read, well spoken person read it and edit it. That would have solved most of the problems.
But after that, would it still be worth posting? That's up to the editors to decide. They may see it as non-sequitr, or just a bad story- errors aside. That problem can only be fixed by the individuals creative ideas, research, and efforts. No amount of editing can fix problems in that area.
Notice how the story was simply clarified, not rewritten. The story still lacks sufficient plot development, character development, attention to the audience who will do the reading and meaning behind writing it. Vapid documentation of fictional events is not a short story. Edited or not, I believe it's a bad story.
As for the use of archaic language, I think of it like this- No one today speaks Olde English. It's never used in modern/general conversation. Therefore, it is imperative that one do research before they use such language. She obviously doesn't grasp how to formulate sentences or speech of the time (nor does she know the culture judging from the behavior of the characters). If she loved Jane Austin novels (they give me migraines personally) or she loves reading Beowulf and understands them in their entirety, then by all means she could adapt the language as to add a sense of realism to the story that takes place in the Victorian era, or anytime before. Otherwise I find it obvious that she just doesn’t have the knowledge base for such a story. This makes readers stop and question the authenticity or intelligence of the writing- rather than pay attention to the ideas and the story that is trying to be told (that may or may not exist in the first place). In the end depending on your research, you could end up with an attentive, thinking audience, or a confused and bored one. Also no one is suggesting that a uniform and strict writing style be adopted. There are rules to be obeyed in any language. They are not to limit people, but to allow clear communication. Through years of experience as an visual artist, I learned that experimentation comes after the understanding of all of the facts. In other words, I would do figure drawing and learn modern art history before I move into non objective art. In the instance of writing, I like to think of Virginia Woolf. She had a firm grasp on writing, she knew her facts and the all of the rules. Therefore it was a very natural move, in the era of change she was in, to experiment. Today her stream of consciousness writing is well respected, and thought of as classic modern English literature. It breaks the rules, but it also feels natural to read, and is a new and inventive way of writing a story. Even though it isn’t a traditional writing style, I would imagine that if she were alive today, that any of her writing would make it through this simple editing process without question. Keep in mind she managed her skills while being totally fucking insane at the same time too. The author of the above article has none of these characteristics put to use, as this is illuminated in the writing. It isn’t special, it isn’t interesting, and it’s not worth it. But that’s not to say that can’t change in an afternoon of thought and writing. |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Revision by Monolycus on Jul 14, 2003 - 11:48 PM (User info | Send a Message) | I agree with most of the points you raised (except about Jane Austen... try reading Pride and Prejudice in a funny voice, it is a hoot!), although my defense of the original submission was motivated by the following:
a.) the original piece was bland (from my perspective, but I am not into much "gothness" as a general rule in my reading selections), but certainly didn't warrant criticism as harsh as it was getting. One has got to be pretty delicate if that is all it takes to makee (sic) one's eyes bleed. I thought a more circumspect and balanced comment was necessary for perspective.
b.) I thought that the clean-up changed not only the tone of the original, but also the content in many places. I can not speak for the author of the piece, but this kind of revision could sacrifice some of what they are trying to say. I know that you mentioned that you saw it as clarification, but it seemed to me to deviate in faithfulness and ended up speaking more about the revisionist than the original author (It reminded me a bit of that game we briefly played where Ick posted a truly godawful piece from someone and a few of us rewrote it in our own images). An editor is always faced with those tough decisions; namely, how much of their work is "editing" someone else's vision and how much is inserting themselves into it. It's a very, very fine line and in this case I think that line was crossed a bit.
c.) While I agree that idiomatic language, such as faux-archaic ( I did my living room in faux-archaic and it didn't work at all. I scrapped it in favour of neo-colonial post-processual), should be practiced until one is "fluent" in it, I was actually fairly impressed that the author took a stab at something "different". What I was impressed with was not the finished piece, but the bravery to attempt to work in a voice which was (presumably) unfamiliar to them.
In addition, I felt it was a brave attempt because historical fiction is probably the biggest and baddest of the frigid bitches to write in. No matter how well written or thoroughly researched a piece is, there is always a wise-ass sitting at the corner of the bar who will remind an author that Crusaders in the 12th century didn't really wear lacey brassieres and crotchless panties under their tunics. The important thing to remember about fiction (historical or otherwise) is that it is made up. The "historical" tragedies of Shakespeare will always say more about Shakespeare himself (or herself, depends on who you ask) and the mores of Elizabethan England than about the founding of the Roman Empire, seventh century Scotland or ninth century Denmark. I can say with authority that the 12th century Crusaders in my fictional world actually went to battle in strapless, sequined evening gowns.
Anyway, to reiterate, I am in agreement with most of your observations. What I am applauding is the author's risk rather than their result. I'm sure that Anthony Burgess went through a lot of trial-and-error before his experiments with language paid off, and I would hate to put someone off of writing at an impressionable stage simply because an early attempt didn't come off as polished as a more veteran writer's work did. Your observation about grasping the fundamentals first is a valid one (and the author might have been trying to run before they could walk), but it certainly wasn't the worst I've seen by a long shot. Hopefully this author will keep plugging away and get better instead of hopelessly discouraged.
I will also toss out that I am more than willing to proofread potential submissions if someone is feeling insecure about their spelling or grammar. Anyone can feel free to drop me (and many other members of this site) a note, and I will be more than happy to take a peek and offer my thoughts. I do not promise to be any less brutally honest than the editors themselves, but a wider range of available perspectives couldn't hurt anything. I am, as always
your faithful se
Read the rest of this comment... |
[ No anonymous comments ]
|
|