Okay listen to me, guys.
The word is "draw". Something that has been drawn is a "drawing".
"Drawl", however, means something else entirely.
You draw a drawing, you do not "drawl" a "drawling".
Pronouncing it this way is one thing-- a bit annoying at times, but I'll chalk it up to accent, whatever. At least it's better than "libary". However, just five minutes ago I just saw someone on an oekaki spell it this way. On purpose.
Do not do this.
Likewise, a "drawer" is something you put things in, it is not a person.
A person who draws is an artist or an illustrator-- not a "drawer".
08 July 2009
08 June 2009
maybespacesjuststoppedbeingcool?
Look, I don't know if you got the memo or not, but spaces go after periods.
... what? They do!
And they go after exclamation points, commas and question marks too, as well as any other punctuation you can think of.
Leaving out those spaces makes your sentences so, so ugly and it makes everything hard to read. You don't want your work to be hard to read, do you? Because I assure you that no one will read it in that case. Or if they do, they will then proceed to flame the hell out of you for wasting their time.
On another note, please don't put three-five spaces in between each word/sentence. This is a less common problem that I mostly see on things written by middle aged types. Please don't do it. Only use one space at a time.
... what? They do!
And they go after exclamation points, commas and question marks too, as well as any other punctuation you can think of.
Leaving out those spaces makes your sentences so, so ugly and it makes everything hard to read. You don't want your work to be hard to read, do you? Because I assure you that no one will read it in that case. Or if they do, they will then proceed to flame the hell out of you for wasting their time.
On another note, please don't put three-five spaces in between each word/sentence. This is a less common problem that I mostly see on things written by middle aged types. Please don't do it. Only use one space at a time.
05 June 2009
\(^o^)/
*rises from the grave*
Okay, guys, seriously, let's talk.
Let's talk about why you fuckers are so goddamn lazy.
I mean, really, what makes you think it's a good idea to insert emoticons into your prose? Do you ever see it in published novels? Of course you don't. Because it's stupid and no publisher in their right mind would give money to an author who does that shit. It's lazy! It's saying "Hey, I can't be arsed to actually describe the character's emotions, so here's a stupid little emoticon, lol! =D"
Fuuuuuck you.
Describe things. Use actual words to describe how your character is feeling, what their expression is, how they're using body language-- words are so much more expressive than emoticons can ever be. This is not an IM conversation, thank you, this is literature.
(Or... or fanfiction. Or just... eh, you know what I mean.)
Special exception may be granted to script-format stories, unless they're actually trying to be stage/screen directions. That format generally exists to focus more on dialogue than anything else, so a lack of description really isn't that big a deal.
In other news, the reason for the dead-ness of this blog is twofold:
One, I have been very busy with school, and two, I have no inspiration.
So basically if I have more time or inspiration I'll post more... and that's that.
You guys can feel free to email me any suggestions for future rants if you'd like, especially if you've got a particularly painful fanfic for me to look at. <3
My email is selanp@planetxeeni.com -- so drop me a line if you've got any ideas.
Okay, guys, seriously, let's talk.
Let's talk about why you fuckers are so goddamn lazy.
I mean, really, what makes you think it's a good idea to insert emoticons into your prose? Do you ever see it in published novels? Of course you don't. Because it's stupid and no publisher in their right mind would give money to an author who does that shit. It's lazy! It's saying "Hey, I can't be arsed to actually describe the character's emotions, so here's a stupid little emoticon, lol! =D"
Fuuuuuck you.
Describe things. Use actual words to describe how your character is feeling, what their expression is, how they're using body language-- words are so much more expressive than emoticons can ever be. This is not an IM conversation, thank you, this is literature.
(Or... or fanfiction. Or just... eh, you know what I mean.)
Special exception may be granted to script-format stories, unless they're actually trying to be stage/screen directions. That format generally exists to focus more on dialogue than anything else, so a lack of description really isn't that big a deal.
In other news, the reason for the dead-ness of this blog is twofold:
One, I have been very busy with school, and two, I have no inspiration.
So basically if I have more time or inspiration I'll post more... and that's that.
You guys can feel free to email me any suggestions for future rants if you'd like, especially if you've got a particularly painful fanfic for me to look at. <3
My email is selanp@planetxeeni.com -- so drop me a line if you've got any ideas.
30 March 2009
MsWord = lolwut?
Okay! Okay. Guys, here is a perfect example of why MsWord's grammar check is made of fail and you might as well just turn it off right now, as it will always steer you in the wrong direction.
So I'm writing, right, and I wrote a sentence containing the phrase "can of shaving creme". Okay? So MsWord didn't recognize that I was using "can" as a noun, which is a common mistake for it so whatever. But to amuse myself I clicked it to see what suggestions it had, and it told me to change "can" to "could".
Remember, please, that "can" was followed immediately by "of".
Thaaaat's right, folks, MsWord thinks that the phrase "could of" is grammatically correct.
And that is why it fails.
Because I can't remember whether I've covered this or not, please note: the phrase people usually mean when they say "could of" is "could've", which is the contraction for "could have". "Could of" is a bastardization based on normal pronunciation and is never correct. Ever. So there.
Why yes, I am actually using Word 2003, so it's entirely possible that this particular issue may not exist in newer versions; that said, it's an excellent example of why you should never trust a machine to do your proofreading for you, because issues like this will always crop up here or there.
So I'm writing, right, and I wrote a sentence containing the phrase "can of shaving creme". Okay? So MsWord didn't recognize that I was using "can" as a noun, which is a common mistake for it so whatever. But to amuse myself I clicked it to see what suggestions it had, and it told me to change "can" to "could".
Remember, please, that "can" was followed immediately by "of".
Thaaaat's right, folks, MsWord thinks that the phrase "could of" is grammatically correct.
And that is why it fails.
Because I can't remember whether I've covered this or not, please note: the phrase people usually mean when they say "could of" is "could've", which is the contraction for "could have". "Could of" is a bastardization based on normal pronunciation and is never correct. Ever. So there.
Why yes, I am actually using Word 2003, so it's entirely possible that this particular issue may not exist in newer versions; that said, it's an excellent example of why you should never trust a machine to do your proofreading for you, because issues like this will always crop up here or there.
24 March 2009
Tua mater, fuckers.
This blog isn't dead, I swear, it's just really inactive.
Gods, I wish I had time to sift through online writing and find things to get angry about...
Well ANYWAY, here's a rant.
Basically this concerns something that happens in spoken word.
I keep seeing people wanting to quote Latin things in their writing, right? And that's fine, Latin is made of cool and anything you write, anything, sounds cool in Latin. You could say, like, Non sum fatuum, tu es, and that sounds cool. So that's not the complaint.
My complaint is that, when these people read their work out loud, they totally fail to get the pronunciation right.
And they sound so damn smug about it!
Like, "Oh, look at me, I'm so smart, I used LATIN. Listen to me! SO SMART." Except that the whole illusion is broken by the fact that they have no clue how to pronounce anything in this language.
Even that wouldn't be that bad normally, since it's a dead language and all. Like I said, it's the smug tone that does it. That self-satisfied look on their faces, like they really think that they're the smartest person in the room, all while butchering even a phrase as simple as veni, vidi, vici.
HINT: It's pronounced wenee, weedee, weekee. Latin V's are pronounced as English W's, and C's are never pronounced as Ch's (they are actually always pronounced as a K).
My school is guilty of it too. Our motto is Vires, Artes, Mores, and everyone always pronounces that with an English V. I think the only person on my campus I've seen pronounce Latin things right is my Classics teacher, because her main field of study is Roman stuff so she's pretty damn good with her Latin!
(Also I'm still trying to figure out what they mean by Vires. Is that... that's courage or something? Strength, maybe? My dictionary also says "manliness", and I know that the motto was first adopted back when the school was a women-only college. Could anyone better with Latin help me out?)
So, look, either get the pronunciation right or stop acting so damn smug. It's all up to you.
Gods, I wish I had time to sift through online writing and find things to get angry about...
Well ANYWAY, here's a rant.
Basically this concerns something that happens in spoken word.
I keep seeing people wanting to quote Latin things in their writing, right? And that's fine, Latin is made of cool and anything you write, anything, sounds cool in Latin. You could say, like, Non sum fatuum, tu es, and that sounds cool. So that's not the complaint.
My complaint is that, when these people read their work out loud, they totally fail to get the pronunciation right.
And they sound so damn smug about it!
Like, "Oh, look at me, I'm so smart, I used LATIN. Listen to me! SO SMART." Except that the whole illusion is broken by the fact that they have no clue how to pronounce anything in this language.
Even that wouldn't be that bad normally, since it's a dead language and all. Like I said, it's the smug tone that does it. That self-satisfied look on their faces, like they really think that they're the smartest person in the room, all while butchering even a phrase as simple as veni, vidi, vici.
HINT: It's pronounced wenee, weedee, weekee. Latin V's are pronounced as English W's, and C's are never pronounced as Ch's (they are actually always pronounced as a K).
My school is guilty of it too. Our motto is Vires, Artes, Mores, and everyone always pronounces that with an English V. I think the only person on my campus I've seen pronounce Latin things right is my Classics teacher, because her main field of study is Roman stuff so she's pretty damn good with her Latin!
(Also I'm still trying to figure out what they mean by Vires. Is that... that's courage or something? Strength, maybe? My dictionary also says "manliness", and I know that the motto was first adopted back when the school was a women-only college. Could anyone better with Latin help me out?)
So, look, either get the pronunciation right or stop acting so damn smug. It's all up to you.
25 February 2009
Subject rants
I know I haven't been updating and I'm sorry about that!
It's just that I haven't had any ideas for posts, and haven't had time to look up bad fanfiction and stuff to get ideas. Or when I have ideas, I don't have time to write them.
Oh well. But here's a post!!
So, I was in class a couple weeks back, and we got on the topic of whether all people from post-colonial countries should write about identity or colonialism. The answer that the class came up with seemed to be a resounding yes, they should, and if they don't then they're just not going to be famous.
Wait... what?
I couldn't seem to get a word in edgewise, so I'll vent my frustrations here:
That is the worst way to think about writing EVER.
First, let's look at how fucking racist that is. Basically the argument was, "If you are Indian, you must write about what it is like to be Indian". But what if an Indian author really just wants to write about love, or family, or death? "No, absolutely not!" The idea is that if they write about anything but Indian-ness, that they're somehow betraying their people and doing them a disservice.
Okay, so does that mean that all black authors have to write about racism or slavery?
Apparently so, actually, because have you heard academics talk about black authors? If they come across any black author who writes about something other than racism, you're going to hear nothing but complaints. Poor Zora Neale Hurston, how dare she focus on womens' rights instead of black rights!
(ignoring that Their Eyes Were Watching God did touch on the subject of race somewhat, really, it's not like academics actually read what they're critisizing)
But meanwhile white authors are free to write about any damn subject we want, but if you're in a minority then you have strictly defined subjects that you must write about, and if you don't then academia will hate and reject you.
... or so the argument goes.
That's the worst thing I've ever heard and any of you who think that this is a good way to view things needs to just grow the fuck up, honestly, it's immature.
If you're Indian and you want to write about what it's like to be Indian, go ahead! If you want to write about colonialism, post-colonialism, whatever, then do it. However, if you want to write about womens' issues, about love or death or space aliens, then do that. Write what you're compelled to write and nothing else. If you force out something that you really don't care that much about, it's going to be godawful, so just don't bother.
Also, I'd like to touch on the hypocrasy of that argument as well.
Basically there's this whole hate going on toward genres that count as "commercial fiction", because supposedly commercial fiction writers tailor their work to match market trends and become famous and famous = bad, apparently. Okay?
So, then, how is it any better, in the literary fiction genre, to say, "Well, I wanted to write about death, but I'm going to write about identity instead, because it will make me more famous".
It's not any better. Anyone who says that it is is full of shit and you should stop listening to a damn word they say.
End rant.
It's just that I haven't had any ideas for posts, and haven't had time to look up bad fanfiction and stuff to get ideas. Or when I have ideas, I don't have time to write them.
Oh well. But here's a post!!
So, I was in class a couple weeks back, and we got on the topic of whether all people from post-colonial countries should write about identity or colonialism. The answer that the class came up with seemed to be a resounding yes, they should, and if they don't then they're just not going to be famous.
Wait... what?
I couldn't seem to get a word in edgewise, so I'll vent my frustrations here:
That is the worst way to think about writing EVER.
First, let's look at how fucking racist that is. Basically the argument was, "If you are Indian, you must write about what it is like to be Indian". But what if an Indian author really just wants to write about love, or family, or death? "No, absolutely not!" The idea is that if they write about anything but Indian-ness, that they're somehow betraying their people and doing them a disservice.
Okay, so does that mean that all black authors have to write about racism or slavery?
Apparently so, actually, because have you heard academics talk about black authors? If they come across any black author who writes about something other than racism, you're going to hear nothing but complaints. Poor Zora Neale Hurston, how dare she focus on womens' rights instead of black rights!
(ignoring that Their Eyes Were Watching God did touch on the subject of race somewhat, really, it's not like academics actually read what they're critisizing)
But meanwhile white authors are free to write about any damn subject we want, but if you're in a minority then you have strictly defined subjects that you must write about, and if you don't then academia will hate and reject you.
... or so the argument goes.
That's the worst thing I've ever heard and any of you who think that this is a good way to view things needs to just grow the fuck up, honestly, it's immature.
If you're Indian and you want to write about what it's like to be Indian, go ahead! If you want to write about colonialism, post-colonialism, whatever, then do it. However, if you want to write about womens' issues, about love or death or space aliens, then do that. Write what you're compelled to write and nothing else. If you force out something that you really don't care that much about, it's going to be godawful, so just don't bother.
Also, I'd like to touch on the hypocrasy of that argument as well.
Basically there's this whole hate going on toward genres that count as "commercial fiction", because supposedly commercial fiction writers tailor their work to match market trends and become famous and famous = bad, apparently. Okay?
So, then, how is it any better, in the literary fiction genre, to say, "Well, I wanted to write about death, but I'm going to write about identity instead, because it will make me more famous".
It's not any better. Anyone who says that it is is full of shit and you should stop listening to a damn word they say.
End rant.
02 January 2009
Moving back into dorm room post
Dear Fanfiction.net users:
I don’t know what part of “ONE-SHOT” you don’t understand.
It’s right there in the summary, for chrissakes! ONE – SHOT. Meaning ONE CHAPTER. A short story. A story that will not be continued. Got it?!
This is way too common. Author writes one-shot, uploads it, makes it very clear that there will be no continuation ever, and yet gets all these people commenting saying “I CAN’T WAIT FOR THE NEXT CHAPTER” and adding it to their alert list.
Fffffff—
WHY
Short stories are still legitimate stories, okay, they have a beginning, a middle and an end and they do not by any means NEED to be continued.
… I know that has nothing to do with writing, but god if it doesn’t drive me up the wall.
I don’t know what part of “ONE-SHOT” you don’t understand.
It’s right there in the summary, for chrissakes! ONE – SHOT. Meaning ONE CHAPTER. A short story. A story that will not be continued. Got it?!
This is way too common. Author writes one-shot, uploads it, makes it very clear that there will be no continuation ever, and yet gets all these people commenting saying “I CAN’T WAIT FOR THE NEXT CHAPTER” and adding it to their alert list.
Fffffff—
WHY
Short stories are still legitimate stories, okay, they have a beginning, a middle and an end and they do not by any means NEED to be continued.
… I know that has nothing to do with writing, but god if it doesn’t drive me up the wall.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
