Monday, August 22, 2011
TITANIC SINKING PREDICTED!
In 1898, fourteen years before the RMS Titanic struck an iceberg on its maiden voyage and sank, a book was published by Morgan Robertson, which seemingly predicted the disaster. The book was “FUTILITY, Or the Wreck of the Titan.”
Yes, Robertson named his imaginary ship the Titan, long before the British shipping company, White Star Line, named its second of three enormous ships Titanic. But the similarities between the fictional and the real don’t end there. The Titan was the largest ship ever built at the time and deemed “unsinkable.” Around midnight on an April night, while sailing between England and New York, it struck an iceberg on its starboard side and--due to insufficient lifeboats--took most of its passengers down with it. Sound familiar?
There’s more. In both cases, the ships were made of steel, had three propellers and two masts, and could accommodate 3000 passengers. In addition, many details were close, if not identical. The Titan was 800 feet long, the Titanic 882. The Titan’s horsepower was 40,000, the Titanic’s 46,000. Titan had 19 watertight compartments, the Titanic 16. Titan carried 24 lifeboats, Titanic 20. There were 3000 people on board the Titan, 2228 on the Titanic. Titan’s speed at impact with the iceberg was 25 knots, the Titanic’s 22.5 knots. However, whereas in the novel a mere 13 people survived, 705 survived Titanic.
I’ve read FUTILITY, and the plot of Robertson’s book is nothing like any of the other novels about the Titanic that I’ve read or James Cameron’s film. Aside from that, it’s not well written and no doubt sank quickly after publication (pun intended) rendering it all but forgotten by April, 1912, when Titanic began its rendezvous with an iceberg and the leap into history.
Inasmuch as next year, 2012, marks the 100th anniversary of the sinking, interest is mounting all over the world. At least two cruises to its gravesite are planned and even more books have been written about the possibly most famous ship ever launched. Robertson’s book was published in 1898 but I doubt it could be today. Who would believe a story in which (1) the largest and strongest ship ever built, (2) deemed unsinkable, (3) on its maiden voyage, (4) carrying some of the world’s wealthiest people (5) would strike an iceberg and sink in less than three hours?
In 1894 my grandfather, John Ashworth, emigrated to the U.S. via the New York, the ship which almost collided with Titanic in Southhampton in 1912, so I’ve had a lifelong interest in the ship. I wrote my novel COLD APRIL in 2008 and it was published in December of 2010. My extensive research led me to FUTILITY, along with many other facts that didn’t find their way into my book. This is the first of several Blog posts in which I’ll share them.
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
THE SECRET - PART II
I live in a large gated community of five thousand homes, where eighty clubs cater to every interest. After my husband and I moved in, I became involved in two activities. I wanted to join a writers club, but there not being one, I started it myself.
As a former amateur actress, I joined the Performing Arts Club and had a part in one of their plays. Two years later, I was voted Vice President of Plays and suggested we produce the famous play THE MAN WHO CAME TO DINNER, written by George S. Kaufman and Moss Hart.
Unfortunately, the president of the club didn’t like it and--as I discovered later--he and his wife, who were professional actors, wanted the leading roles in a different play that year. They passed out copies of that script to all board members and encouraged them to vote for it instead of the one my committee chose. Friends insisted I’d been unfairly treated.
I then decided that, since the couple had had the play they wanted, mine could be suggested the following year. It was, and the president protested again. During the day of voting--while I was in another state attending a family wedding--he suggested a different play and mine lost again. I had no reason to believe a third try would succeed, so the project seemed impossible.
Meanwhile, however, new residents moved into our community and two very talented actors became my friends. Karen (who I wanted to play the female lead), and Marty (a perfect male lead), were behind me and offered to help get the play performed. Together we approached another retirement complex nearby which had a performing arts club, and their board agreed to put on the play, the president of the club signing the Agreement.
A week later, he told me they’d changed their mind. I learned a member of their board was a good friend of our club president and he had probably sabotaged our deal.
Once more the project seemed doomed, but the idea that the play should be presented refused to go away. I was reminded of a little theatre in town which put on several plays a year, and spoke with their director. She was willing to rent the theatre to me and we set a date. Because the theatre was small, and I wanted to keep the ticket price reasonable, I realized the production might sustain a financial loss. However, I planned to use my personal savings if necessary.
Other problems arose. I had to become an "entity" which would "hire" the theatre for the play, which meant paying a county fee and publishing my fictitious business name in the local newspaper. Then I had to buy liability insurance for that entity. Two weeks later the theatre closed down altogether.
By now, even my husband, who had supported me, told me to forget the idea. However, in spite of now having been rejected four times, I continued to feel it was the right thing to do.
Karen reminded me that some of the writers in my writers club wanted to write plays, and suggested I go to their board and ask if they’d sponsor the play. Three days later, the association gave permission and we could do the play on our own stage.
The only dates we could get the theatre were June 10-13, and many residents leave the desert during the summer, but ten actors from the Performing Arts Club (hereinafter PAC) signed on. To complete the cast, I took a small part in addition to directing, and we included actors who didn’t live in our community.
And then more problems arose. The actor playing the butler resigned and I had to replace him. A month later one of the two main actresses backed out. Again I was told to forget the project: after all, tickets were not on sale yet. But Karen and Marty were still there and we had made four large posters and paid for advertising, so I kept on. Two weeks later, a friend from my writing club agreed to take the part.
Finally, twelve days before opening, one of the outside actors, who had a very important part, failed to come to rehearsal and we heard he had simply "disappeared." He didn’t answer his phone or e-mails. No one knew where he was.
I called every male actor I knew but none was available. Suddenly it was Wednesday, and the play was due to open eight days later, on Thursday night. I spent the entire day on the phone. I called the acting coach at the local college and phoned every man between the ages of twenty and sixty who was listed as a member of the desert actors network, but I spoke mainly to answering machines.
One man said he might do it if I paid him (no other actors were being paid) and, desperate, I agreed. He asked me to leave a copy of the script at the gate to our complex, but when I took it there, I discovered they were not allowed to hold things for people. I took it to the front desk of the clubhouse and told the actor to pick it up there. At five p.m. he phoned to say he had been to the clubhouse but the desk had closed at 4:30. He was no longer interested. I was home alone. I felt physically sick and couldn’t swallow. Tears ran down my face. Then, as if it were a voice, I heard the words, "Go forward."
Yes, we had a rehearsal at six, so I went to the theatre. In the middle of rehearsing act one, my cell phone rang, and it was one of the actors I’d phoned that day, returning my call. He said he might be interested and came over right away. He had acted in and directed many plays in the valley, and not only looked the part, he played it perfectly and knew all his lines by the next day. The cast called him a "miracle."
The show was a huge success. People leaving the theatre said it was the best play ever done here, and four people left their e-mail addresses and asked to be notified for our next one. The Writers Club, which paid all expenses, made a small profit.
What impresses me most is how every seeming setback along the way turned out to be a blessing. Had we done the play with PAC instead of my own theatre company, we could not have used the four experienced outside actors. Had we done it in the neighboring complex, it would have required traveling and working with a smaller stage. Had we done it at the little theatre, there would have been even more traveling, plus fewer people could have seen the play, to say nothing of the huge cost to me.
As for the actors who quit during rehearsals, the butler we used turned out to be far better than the original one cast. The actress who stepped in was far better than the first would have been; and the "miracle" actor at the end was not only better than our original choice, but better than anyone else I could ever have chosen for the part.
As proprietor of my acting troupe, Summer Repertory Players, I had joined the Desert Theatre League which is like the Broadway Tonys but for plays and musicals in this valley and, in October, they issued nominations for the 110 productions they judged that year. THE MAN WHO CAME TO DINNER received eight! On November 14th at the 23rd annual Desert Theatre League Stars Awards dinner, we won four! Not only was I not expecting to win any, we almost swept the Comedy awards. Marty won for Best Lead Actor, Karen for Best Lead Actress, John (our British non-resident) won Best Supporting Actor, and I won for Best Director of a comedy.
My dream of producing the play I loved came true in ways I could never have imagined. Once again, persistence pays.
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
THE SECRET
Many years ago, when I first started writing novels, I clipped bits of articles on the subject and stuck them on the wall above my computer. The number of clippings grew and I taped them together until I had several strings of these gems of wisdom from published authors. One day, in a bout of office cleaning--and finding many of the clippings were yellow with age--I pulled them all down and read them. And then I learned the secret of success as a writer: Persistence.
Article after article mentioned persistence as an important--if not the most important--ingredient. And I'm living proof that it's true. In December, Avalon Books will publish SOUTHERN STAR, a romance novel a friend and I wrote twenty-six years ago.
Of course, it's not exactly the same book. Besides a few title changes, and an entirely new scene added, I improved it over the years, as I learned my craft. But the characters, the plot, the complications which led to the HEA ending, remained the same. Without going through the fat file containing copies of my letters and the rejections, I can't tell you how many times I submitted the book to publishers since 1984, but, just since 2002, (when I began to keep track on three-by-five cards) it went out nineteen times. In fact, Avalon rejected it twice.
What this tells me is that, when you have a good story, you should never give up trying to sell it.
Sure, I had to add cell phones and update the language and references, but I never gave up my belief in the worth of the core romance. I just had to keep trying until the right person--even in this difficult time for the publishing industry--saw what I saw and liked it.
Since 1984, I've sold nine other romance novels (including my very first one (which I wrote in 1975 and sold in 1986), so maybe I'm just a slow learner. But this one is particularly gratifying to me, and I hope my experience will inspire other writers to hold to their vision. A writer who hasn't sold her novel isn't a failure. She's a not-yet-published author, and time and persistence may make her dreams come true, as they did for me.
Article after article mentioned persistence as an important--if not the most important--ingredient. And I'm living proof that it's true. In December, Avalon Books will publish SOUTHERN STAR, a romance novel a friend and I wrote twenty-six years ago.
Of course, it's not exactly the same book. Besides a few title changes, and an entirely new scene added, I improved it over the years, as I learned my craft. But the characters, the plot, the complications which led to the HEA ending, remained the same. Without going through the fat file containing copies of my letters and the rejections, I can't tell you how many times I submitted the book to publishers since 1984, but, just since 2002, (when I began to keep track on three-by-five cards) it went out nineteen times. In fact, Avalon rejected it twice.
What this tells me is that, when you have a good story, you should never give up trying to sell it.
Sure, I had to add cell phones and update the language and references, but I never gave up my belief in the worth of the core romance. I just had to keep trying until the right person--even in this difficult time for the publishing industry--saw what I saw and liked it.
Since 1984, I've sold nine other romance novels (including my very first one (which I wrote in 1975 and sold in 1986), so maybe I'm just a slow learner. But this one is particularly gratifying to me, and I hope my experience will inspire other writers to hold to their vision. A writer who hasn't sold her novel isn't a failure. She's a not-yet-published author, and time and persistence may make her dreams come true, as they did for me.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
ACTING AND WRITING
I'm back to blogging after a four-month break in which I practiced my other hobby: acting. I didn't just have a small role in the Moss Hart and George S Kaufman comedy THE MAN WHO CAME TO DINNER. I produced and directed it.
I had two friends who helped because, like me, they believed in the play and wanted to see it performed (as well as act in it). However, the burden of doing everything--or seeing that it got done--fell almost exclusively on my shoulders. My wonderful husband built the set and the mummy-case, but I was producer, publicity person and director all at once. I had to find furniture for the set, design the newspaper ad, prepare and print the program, hire the restaurant for the cast party (and the two lunches I provided for the cast), join the Desert Theatre League and make sure the judges had free tickets, pay the royalty for the play, get people to sell tickets, people to provide props, costumes and makeup, and also keep track of every expense. There were almost fifty receipts just from Lowe's and Home Depot for building the set. I barely slept at night. I'd wake up at five a.m. and not be able to go back to sleep because my mind whirled with all the things I had to do that day.
The play was performed Thursday through Sunday, June 10-13, on the ballroom stage here in our residential complex, and it was a great success, with people claiming it was the best they'd ever seen here. Four playgoers left their names and e-mail addresses so they could be notified of our next one.
The point, however, is that many writers are good actors and actors frequently write good books. My writer friends here are also good actors, and that's certainly true among stage and screen actors who write books. My theory for why this is so is based on the fact that good authors often visualize the scenes they write, "act it out" in their minds. And actors, having appeared in some good plays, begin to have a feel for what makes an interesting premise or scene.
I don't think I'll direct another play, but my next project is to combine these elements. I've just been elected chairman of Repertory Players, a group of actors who perform short "staged readings" at free shows here four times a year. Furthermore, I'm going to urge the Writers Circle (the club I started four years ago) to write short skits and one-act plays that will be performed by those actors. And, as if you hadn't already guessed, some members are already in both groups.
Meanwhile, I'm back to writing both mystery and romantic suspense books and looking forward to a busy, fun year.
I had two friends who helped because, like me, they believed in the play and wanted to see it performed (as well as act in it). However, the burden of doing everything--or seeing that it got done--fell almost exclusively on my shoulders. My wonderful husband built the set and the mummy-case, but I was producer, publicity person and director all at once. I had to find furniture for the set, design the newspaper ad, prepare and print the program, hire the restaurant for the cast party (and the two lunches I provided for the cast), join the Desert Theatre League and make sure the judges had free tickets, pay the royalty for the play, get people to sell tickets, people to provide props, costumes and makeup, and also keep track of every expense. There were almost fifty receipts just from Lowe's and Home Depot for building the set. I barely slept at night. I'd wake up at five a.m. and not be able to go back to sleep because my mind whirled with all the things I had to do that day.
The play was performed Thursday through Sunday, June 10-13, on the ballroom stage here in our residential complex, and it was a great success, with people claiming it was the best they'd ever seen here. Four playgoers left their names and e-mail addresses so they could be notified of our next one.
The point, however, is that many writers are good actors and actors frequently write good books. My writer friends here are also good actors, and that's certainly true among stage and screen actors who write books. My theory for why this is so is based on the fact that good authors often visualize the scenes they write, "act it out" in their minds. And actors, having appeared in some good plays, begin to have a feel for what makes an interesting premise or scene.
I don't think I'll direct another play, but my next project is to combine these elements. I've just been elected chairman of Repertory Players, a group of actors who perform short "staged readings" at free shows here four times a year. Furthermore, I'm going to urge the Writers Circle (the club I started four years ago) to write short skits and one-act plays that will be performed by those actors. And, as if you hadn't already guessed, some members are already in both groups.
Meanwhile, I'm back to writing both mystery and romantic suspense books and looking forward to a busy, fun year.
Saturday, February 20, 2010
AVATAR - The Movie
As recent subscribers to Netflix, we've seen more movies in the last three months than in all of last year. But we do like movies and I think we're caught up. But with all the hype going around, we decided not to wait for the DVD but go to see AVATAR in the theatre. In 3-D at the IMAX. What a waste of $22.
In all honesty, I have to admit that, according to the polls, 82% of viewers liked the film. But you and I both know that movies these days are made for teenagers. That's why they open on Fridays: 'cause the kids have a big allowance and no school the next day. Plus they go two or three times. But again, to be fair, perhaps most adults liked it too. I'm just not one of them. What can I say? I write romance and mystery novels, not science fiction or fantasy, and that's plainly what AVATAR is. So shoot me.
We went early, stood in a long line and got seats right in the center. It was quite dark, as if filmed in green and brown, and I didn't see much difference between seeing it with or without the special glasses. As we left the building, my husband said the right word for the experience: ordeal. Like me, he wanted it to be over long before it was. In my opinion, when the audience starts thinking it should be over, it's too long. I don't care how many awards it gets, 162 minutes requires more romance and/or mystery and a whole lot less weirdness, constant action and violence. Even as science fiction, this is no STAR WARS, which I liked.
I especially hated the natives having tails. What was that all about? I doubt that--if humans mated with natives--they'd have tails. Unless they used them (and they didn't in this film) I believe appendages tend to disappear. I also didn't find the blue people attractive or worthy of my sympathy. Some say the film is a metaphor for what conquering people (us) do to indigenous people in foreign lands. However, although they're right, and I don't condone what we did to the Indians or what the British and Dutch did in South Africa, we didn't do it with gigantic military weapons. And all to get a mineral called "unobtanium." Now, that I loved!
The Internet is full of reviews of the film, and, just to show I'm not the only person who wasn't starstruck by the computer wizardry, here are some of their comments:
"If you like graphics and special effects, you'll love it."
"Adjectives like beautiful and breathtaking have been thrown at it, but I'll add a third B, Boring."
"...everything about the story, the setting, the dialog, and the parts that aren't purely visual, is awful."
"DANCES WITH WOLVES in outer space."
"...doing the Funky Chicken with aliens."
"Enough toys to please all the kids in the audience."
"A big, dumb movie built to make money... it resists serious criticism. You might as well analyze a beach ball."
"...overlong, dramatically two-dimensional, smug and simplistic."
And my favorite: "Like staring at the world's most expensive screen-saver."
In all honesty, I have to admit that, according to the polls, 82% of viewers liked the film. But you and I both know that movies these days are made for teenagers. That's why they open on Fridays: 'cause the kids have a big allowance and no school the next day. Plus they go two or three times. But again, to be fair, perhaps most adults liked it too. I'm just not one of them. What can I say? I write romance and mystery novels, not science fiction or fantasy, and that's plainly what AVATAR is. So shoot me.
We went early, stood in a long line and got seats right in the center. It was quite dark, as if filmed in green and brown, and I didn't see much difference between seeing it with or without the special glasses. As we left the building, my husband said the right word for the experience: ordeal. Like me, he wanted it to be over long before it was. In my opinion, when the audience starts thinking it should be over, it's too long. I don't care how many awards it gets, 162 minutes requires more romance and/or mystery and a whole lot less weirdness, constant action and violence. Even as science fiction, this is no STAR WARS, which I liked.
I especially hated the natives having tails. What was that all about? I doubt that--if humans mated with natives--they'd have tails. Unless they used them (and they didn't in this film) I believe appendages tend to disappear. I also didn't find the blue people attractive or worthy of my sympathy. Some say the film is a metaphor for what conquering people (us) do to indigenous people in foreign lands. However, although they're right, and I don't condone what we did to the Indians or what the British and Dutch did in South Africa, we didn't do it with gigantic military weapons. And all to get a mineral called "unobtanium." Now, that I loved!
The Internet is full of reviews of the film, and, just to show I'm not the only person who wasn't starstruck by the computer wizardry, here are some of their comments:
"If you like graphics and special effects, you'll love it."
"Adjectives like beautiful and breathtaking have been thrown at it, but I'll add a third B, Boring."
"...everything about the story, the setting, the dialog, and the parts that aren't purely visual, is awful."
"DANCES WITH WOLVES in outer space."
"...doing the Funky Chicken with aliens."
"Enough toys to please all the kids in the audience."
"A big, dumb movie built to make money... it resists serious criticism. You might as well analyze a beach ball."
"...overlong, dramatically two-dimensional, smug and simplistic."
And my favorite: "Like staring at the world's most expensive screen-saver."
Friday, January 15, 2010
BLOOPERS, BLUNDERS AND BOO-BOOS
As a former proofreader for a national magazine, I'm perhaps more aware of literary blunders than your casual reader. But, in these days of difficulty getting published, writers need to be more scrupulous than ever so that an editor won't find her "pet peeve" of author mistakes in your manuscript.
If I were an editor, my Top Ten List of No-nos would be the following because I've seen them too often.
1. Could've - could of. There is no legitimate reason to use "could of." I've seen it in printed books and it apparently stems from the author having missed an English class in grade school. He/she means "could've" which is a contraction of the two words, "could" and "have." Example: "I could've been a contender." "I could have danced all night."
2. It's - its. "It's" with an apostrophe, is a contraction of "it is" or "it has." Example: "It's in your best interest to stop doing that now." "Its," without an apostrophe, is a possessive. Example: "That book, even with its tattered cover, belongs in your library."
3. doctors - apple's. While we're on the subject of apostrophes, please remember that a plural word needs none. Example: "The apples were ripe and the doctors ate them." If you put an apostrophe before the "s" you have turned the word into a possessive. Example: "The doctor's time was limited."
4. Nauseated - nauseous. Nauseated is how you feel when something makes you ill. Example: "I was nauseated by the odor coming from the landfill." Nauseous is an adjective describing the thing that makes you ill. Example: "The landfill gave off a nauseous odor."
5. Try to - try and. Technically, there is no "try and." If your character is going to try to do something, use "try to," not "try and." Example: "I will try to help you." However, if you say "try and," you imply you'll succeed. But what if you don't succeed? You've told a lie.
6. I couldn't care less - I could care less. Once again, the second construction should never be used. After all, if you could care less, then you must care somewhat. But you're trying to say that you care so little, it would be impossible for you to care any less than you do.
7. lose - loose. Look them up in the dictionary. To lose something is to no longer have it. Example: "I don't want to lose the lovely watch you gave me." Something which is "loose" is not lost but of an unstable consistency. Example: "The watch slipped off my wrist because the band was too loose."
8. incidents - incidentses. The latter is not a word. One event is an "incident." Two or more events are "incidents." There is no such word as "incidentses."
9. roll - role. As a noun, a "roll" can be a small pastry. As a verb it means moving or turning. Example: "He let the car roll down the hill." "Role" is a noun which describes a part you might play in a film or in life. Examples: "The role required me to exit the stage." or, "I'm tired of playing the role of your wicked stepmother."
10. titled - entitled. When you give a book a title, you have "titled" it. Example: "I titled my book MASQUERADE." "Entitled" means something is owed or expected. Example: "As the eldest I'm entitled to the largest piece."
11. I hope I don't have to tell you that--unless you're writing dialogue in the voice of an illiterate character--you should never write, "Me and my brother," "Her and I," "we was," or "she don't." But I often see "myself" used instead of "me." Don't try to get fancy. Wrong: "She gave the book to John and myself." Right: "She gave the book to John and me." If John was gone, you'd say "She gave the book to me," wouldn't you?
12. farther - further. "Farther" refers to physical distances. Example: "The house we sought was farther down the road." Use "further" to indicate figurative distances. Example: "We had to look further among the possible suspects in the murder."
13. breath - breathe. "Breath" is a noun. Example: "He took my breath away." Breathe" is a verb. Example: "It's so hot, I can hardly breathe."
Well, I see my Top Ten list turned into a Baker's dozen, but I found it hard to choose fewer than thirteen. Writers seem to invent more bloopers every year. Two wonderful (and inexpensive) books on the subject are MORTAL SYNTAX and GRAMMAR SNOBS ARE GREAT BIG MEANIES, by June Casagrande. Her website, grammarsnobs.com, contains her weekly newspaper column, the "grammar lesson of the week," and her Blog. All contain useful information, written in a lively style. And, for punctuation, I recommend EATS, SHOOTS AND LEAVES by Lynne Truss.
If you have some pet grammar peeves, leave a comment. And may your writing contain no bloopers, blunders or boo-boos.
If I were an editor, my Top Ten List of No-nos would be the following because I've seen them too often.
1. Could've - could of. There is no legitimate reason to use "could of." I've seen it in printed books and it apparently stems from the author having missed an English class in grade school. He/she means "could've" which is a contraction of the two words, "could" and "have." Example: "I could've been a contender." "I could have danced all night."
2. It's - its. "It's" with an apostrophe, is a contraction of "it is" or "it has." Example: "It's in your best interest to stop doing that now." "Its," without an apostrophe, is a possessive. Example: "That book, even with its tattered cover, belongs in your library."
3. doctors - apple's. While we're on the subject of apostrophes, please remember that a plural word needs none. Example: "The apples were ripe and the doctors ate them." If you put an apostrophe before the "s" you have turned the word into a possessive. Example: "The doctor's time was limited."
4. Nauseated - nauseous. Nauseated is how you feel when something makes you ill. Example: "I was nauseated by the odor coming from the landfill." Nauseous is an adjective describing the thing that makes you ill. Example: "The landfill gave off a nauseous odor."
5. Try to - try and. Technically, there is no "try and." If your character is going to try to do something, use "try to," not "try and." Example: "I will try to help you." However, if you say "try and," you imply you'll succeed. But what if you don't succeed? You've told a lie.
6. I couldn't care less - I could care less. Once again, the second construction should never be used. After all, if you could care less, then you must care somewhat. But you're trying to say that you care so little, it would be impossible for you to care any less than you do.
7. lose - loose. Look them up in the dictionary. To lose something is to no longer have it. Example: "I don't want to lose the lovely watch you gave me." Something which is "loose" is not lost but of an unstable consistency. Example: "The watch slipped off my wrist because the band was too loose."
8. incidents - incidentses. The latter is not a word. One event is an "incident." Two or more events are "incidents." There is no such word as "incidentses."
9. roll - role. As a noun, a "roll" can be a small pastry. As a verb it means moving or turning. Example: "He let the car roll down the hill." "Role" is a noun which describes a part you might play in a film or in life. Examples: "The role required me to exit the stage." or, "I'm tired of playing the role of your wicked stepmother."
10. titled - entitled. When you give a book a title, you have "titled" it. Example: "I titled my book MASQUERADE." "Entitled" means something is owed or expected. Example: "As the eldest I'm entitled to the largest piece."
11. I hope I don't have to tell you that--unless you're writing dialogue in the voice of an illiterate character--you should never write, "Me and my brother," "Her and I," "we was," or "she don't." But I often see "myself" used instead of "me." Don't try to get fancy. Wrong: "She gave the book to John and myself." Right: "She gave the book to John and me." If John was gone, you'd say "She gave the book to me," wouldn't you?
12. farther - further. "Farther" refers to physical distances. Example: "The house we sought was farther down the road." Use "further" to indicate figurative distances. Example: "We had to look further among the possible suspects in the murder."
13. breath - breathe. "Breath" is a noun. Example: "He took my breath away." Breathe" is a verb. Example: "It's so hot, I can hardly breathe."
Well, I see my Top Ten list turned into a Baker's dozen, but I found it hard to choose fewer than thirteen. Writers seem to invent more bloopers every year. Two wonderful (and inexpensive) books on the subject are MORTAL SYNTAX and GRAMMAR SNOBS ARE GREAT BIG MEANIES, by June Casagrande. Her website, grammarsnobs.com, contains her weekly newspaper column, the "grammar lesson of the week," and her Blog. All contain useful information, written in a lively style. And, for punctuation, I recommend EATS, SHOOTS AND LEAVES by Lynne Truss.
If you have some pet grammar peeves, leave a comment. And may your writing contain no bloopers, blunders or boo-boos.
Saturday, December 19, 2009
NAMES - TWO
Last August I posted an article about names, especially strange names. So I read with interest something on the subject in Time Magazine's December 7th issue. According to that, if you want to keep your kid out of prison, name him Michael, not Maxwell. In a study reported in Social Science Quarterly, people with unpopular names have a higher risk of criminality than people with popular ones.
This was not only news to me, but surprising news at that. In fact, I would have thought just the opposite might be true. But no. The researchers took records of over 15,000 boys and their names and tracked the crimes committed when the boys were adolescents. Boys with popular names, like Michael, committed the fewest crimes. Those with less popular names, like Preston or Alec. committed the most. The theory is that a familiar name leads to greater social acceptance, which leads to greater self-acceptance, and that leads to better behavior.
Hey, don't shoot the messenger. I'm just reporting this and, obviously, there are exceptions by the dozens of people with unusual names becoming famous for their good behavior, like, say, Barak Obama.
But, leaving the names of real people, let's talk about names of occupations. Remember when a janitor was a janitor and not a "building custodian"? Or a secretary was not an "administrative assistant?" Not that I object to people getting their self-esteem anyway they can. The one that really bugs me, though, is "Human Resources Department" instead of the old-fashioned "Personnel." Personnel was certainly shorter, and I don't think anyone was confused about what it meant. However, as I stated in one of my yet-to-be-published novels:
"Human Resources is rather scary. It makes me feel that, if I were to work for that company and somehow fail to perform adequately, I could end up on the cafeteria menu as 'Burger of the Month.'"
And then there's the word "zest." How did lemon or orange peel morph into zest? According to the dictionary, it hasn't, but every TV cooking show host talks about adding "zest" to a recipe, when really all she's doing is grating lemon or orange peel. I felt relieved that not everyone has fallen for this "uppity" name when I read in the November issue of Sunset Magazine a recipe that called for "grated orange peel."
And as a cooking magazine, Sunset is high on the list of food experts. They have their own kitchens where every recipe is tested before it's printed in the magazine. In fact, years ago, when I lived in the San Francisco Bay Area, I knew the people who owned the magazine, went through their kitchens myself, and got to taste the results of their testing. I remember it well. Yummy!
So don't call it zest - call it by its real name: grated lemon (or orange) peel - and strike a blow for truth in labeling.
This was not only news to me, but surprising news at that. In fact, I would have thought just the opposite might be true. But no. The researchers took records of over 15,000 boys and their names and tracked the crimes committed when the boys were adolescents. Boys with popular names, like Michael, committed the fewest crimes. Those with less popular names, like Preston or Alec. committed the most. The theory is that a familiar name leads to greater social acceptance, which leads to greater self-acceptance, and that leads to better behavior.
Hey, don't shoot the messenger. I'm just reporting this and, obviously, there are exceptions by the dozens of people with unusual names becoming famous for their good behavior, like, say, Barak Obama.
But, leaving the names of real people, let's talk about names of occupations. Remember when a janitor was a janitor and not a "building custodian"? Or a secretary was not an "administrative assistant?" Not that I object to people getting their self-esteem anyway they can. The one that really bugs me, though, is "Human Resources Department" instead of the old-fashioned "Personnel." Personnel was certainly shorter, and I don't think anyone was confused about what it meant. However, as I stated in one of my yet-to-be-published novels:
"Human Resources is rather scary. It makes me feel that, if I were to work for that company and somehow fail to perform adequately, I could end up on the cafeteria menu as 'Burger of the Month.'"
And then there's the word "zest." How did lemon or orange peel morph into zest? According to the dictionary, it hasn't, but every TV cooking show host talks about adding "zest" to a recipe, when really all she's doing is grating lemon or orange peel. I felt relieved that not everyone has fallen for this "uppity" name when I read in the November issue of Sunset Magazine a recipe that called for "grated orange peel."
And as a cooking magazine, Sunset is high on the list of food experts. They have their own kitchens where every recipe is tested before it's printed in the magazine. In fact, years ago, when I lived in the San Francisco Bay Area, I knew the people who owned the magazine, went through their kitchens myself, and got to taste the results of their testing. I remember it well. Yummy!
So don't call it zest - call it by its real name: grated lemon (or orange) peel - and strike a blow for truth in labeling.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)