Google+
This blog has moved. Please go over to this link to see my new website.

Thursday 29 March 2012

An Offer of Mentoring for Writers

I was sent the following by a professional contact on LinkedIn Terrence Brejla is described as
Visionary Communications, Social Media, and Marketing Professional.  Although I don't know Terrence personally, he came well recommended. 

Subsequent to the initial information, I received suggestions that he may not be all I was originally given to believe. I have no knowledge of the man or his work and only passed the information on because of the link through LinkedIn. However, I have no wish to either endorse or denigrate the man or his services. The easiest thing for me to have done under the circumstances would have been to remove the original post completely. However, I've decided to remove only the 'advert' such as it was and pass this on to you for you to investigate and proceed as you will.


I have no connection to this, other than my link on LinkedIn, a professional networking community I strongly advise you to join.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Why I Set my Novel in the Yorkshire Dales.


Writers choose locations for their fiction for all manner of reasons. Sometimes it's because the place is a familiar haunt. Sometimes the setting is exactly right for the fabric of the story. Sometimes the landscape is so alien to the author that it stimulates his imagination.

I grew up in Yorkshire and it has been my home for much of my adult life, though by no means all of it. Many years ago, when I was married to my first wife, in fact, (and I've been married to my current lovely lady for coming up to 24 years) we were walking in a particularly remote and rugged part of the Yorkshire Dales. There are some sink holes in this area. For those who don't know, these are geological features that are best described as vertical caves. Often quite deep, usually narrow, they are places where water has eaten away the porous rock and left a deep pit in the surface of the Earth. The Buttertubs, as this particular set of sink holes is known, are a series of pits close to the narrow and precipitous road that leads from Hawes to Muker. Readily accessible, they are a tourist attraction for many motorists but few walkers.

It was a chill and windy day when I approached these holes in the ground, grey clouds skimmed a pale sun, and the gusty wind made waves through the long grass. At that time, the pits were unfenced and entirely open to public gaze with none of the modern obsessive concern for 'health and safety' rules. It was possible to step right up to and, indeed, over, the edges of these shafts. I am uncomfortable with heights and, since I was determined to gaze into the bottom of the largest and deepest, I sank to my knees and crawled forward until I could safely peer into the dim depths. As I did so, quite inexplicably, I was visited by a brief image of a woman's body at the bottom and the question was posed in my writer's mind, 'What would you do if you found a dead body down there?'

That thought stayed with me over the years. A divorce and remarriage took me to different parts of the country and overseas for the first time. But I was drawn again and again to the Yorkshire Dales until, almost on a whim, my wife and I with our new daughter just 2 years old, moved into the area to live. Our walks became regular events, regardless of weather. We experienced everything from dry thirsty heatwaves to icy winters cloaked in deep drifting snow and everything in between, as can only happen in good old island Britain.

It was whilst we lived in this location that the initial question slowly coalesced into a plot, peopled by the characters I had long lived with in my imagination. The story developed and the setting became part of the narrative, as much a character in the tale as Faith or Leigh, in fact. It was the natural setting for the rugged and tough tale and the fact that I was living in it made the descriptions so much easier. So, the first draft was completed at the same time as I renovated the house we'd bought and worked part time for a local holiday accommodation company.

Life came along, in the form of redundancy, just days before the new millennium was about to commence. At the age of 51, I understood my chances of re-employment in the area were slim and I moved the family back to my native East Yorkshire, where I found a job. It was some years before I found time to write again and dug out that first draft. I changed the viewpoint characters, giving both the male and female protagonists a chance to have their say in first person. I changed relationships that formed essential background to the story. I changed incidents. I changed the ages of the protagonists. What I didn't change was the setting. The Yorkshire Dales remained as valid a landscape as it had been from the beginning.

For those who don't know the area, it is a National Park. An area of outstanding natural beauty and considered by many to be the best walking country in Europe. It's populated by a native people who are as tough as the characteristic dry stone walls, as stubborn as the local sheep, as different as individuals as are the inhabitants of any region.

I changed the time frame to a period that was historically real: the severe drought of 1976, since the weather and the burgeoning philosophy of 'free love' allowed me to introduce a degree of external nudity that would otherwise be unlikely in this wild country. The nudity was an essential element in the relationship of the two protagonists and a useful tool in examining the fight between innocence and corruption that is at the heart of the story.

So, there you have it. Those are the reasons I came to set my romantic thriller, Breaking Faith, in one of the most beautiful parts of the English countryside. Many readers have commented on how apt the setting is. Whether you'll agree or not can only be determined by reading the book. And I give you the opportunity to do that for free here on this blog. Each week of this year I am posting a chapter. There are 50 in all, so it'll last for almost the whole year. And each post is accompanied by one of my photographs taken in the Dales, so you can experience the landscape for yourself. I started in January and the link to that first instalment is here. You'll find the rest of the early chapters listed in the archive and you're welcome to join the readers as we take the journey together to the end.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Sunday 25 March 2012

The Week, Writing and Other Things.

The Artist's Way: A Spiritual Path to Higher C...
The Artist's Way: A Spiritual Path to Higher Creativity (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
I started reading Julia Cameron's The Artist's Way last week, without realising it's actually a 12 week course. So, I decided I'd try it out. I've previously done the exercises in Dorothea Brande's Becoming a Writer and found them extremely useful, so I thought this might prove a similar experience. My verdict, after the first week?  I think this might be something special. You have to get over her use of 'God' as a generic term for the creative force outside yourself, but, once you've overcome that barrier, a lot of what she says makes sense. I've already identified incidents that may well have been responsible for various barriers I've placed in my own way throughout life and I'm now ready to do something about removing or clearing those hurdles.

The grass has had its first cut, the mild weather allowing it to grow at an alarming rate. So, a few hours spent in the garden. There's a deal to do out there, but most of it will have to wait until I have more free time and spare energy.

My brother and his wife are leaving the town for a village some 70 miles or so away, so we spent a grand evening with them and drank too much wine but had a great time. As he's been clearing his bookshelves for the move, I've also inherited some new books to add to my 'to read' stack, which now totals over 190 titles. Updated the lists on the blog and Goodreads to account for that.

Read my Writers' Forum magazine and Writers' Digest and updated the Writing Contests page on the blog here. After asking the question, I discovered a way to place PDF docs on the blog, so I've installed one for the contests, another for my 'to read' list and yet another under the 'Tools & Links' tab; this latter is an alphabetical listing of over 10,000 first names taken from all over the world and colour coded for gender. Useful for searching for suitable character names, or even for choosing the name for your new baby. And, since these are PDF docs, I thought I'd better install a link for people to download the Abode PDF reader, which is free, in case they don't have it.

So, not a lot of writing done, apart from the 3 hand-written pages that are a daily requirement of the course, and a feature to place on the blog at the end of the month. But I'm gradually clearing the decks and making space to get on with some serious work in the near future.

The NaNoWriMo novel? I'm no longer sure what to do with that. Let's say it's not developing the way I had hoped. Time will tell on that one.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Thursday 22 March 2012

Can Humans See Nudity in Art as Purely Aesthetic?

Posing for the camera. Group nude on a beach.
Image via Wikipedia

If you're coy, or easily embarrassed, put on your dark glasses whilst you read this. And make sure your maiden aunt is out of the room. Don't want to make her blush, do we?
I'm interested in exploring our attitudes to nudity, especially as it applies to art; art of all types, whether that's painting, sculpture, theatre, cinema, or literature. The latter, of course, is my personal concern, as a writer.

Before we look at the issue as it relates to art, we need to understand what it means in life in general. It goes without saying, of course, that we're born naked. To understand why there's so much guilt, embarrassment and general negativity toward social nudity I'd need to go on for chapters. So, I've placed a potted and personal hypothesis at the foot of this piece, for those who are interested or curious. But, for our current purposes, it's enough to accept that nudity is a subject cloaked in secrecy, guilt, excitement, passion, disgust, admiration, lust and hypocrisy.

Because this natural state has developed associations that are so unnatural, writers and artists have had to approach it with a full awareness of the contemporary spread of attitudes. In earlier times it was a little easier, since the majority of educated people, those who'd come into contact with works of art portraying nudity, were also subject to the thinking imposed by the moral authority of the church, synagogue or mosque. I exclude the eastern religions, as they have generally displayed a much more enlightened and liberal attitude to the subject.

In our current multi-ethnic, multi-cultural, multi-ethical society in the West, the situation is fraught with danger. On the one hand, the extreme sects of the Abrahamic religions universally condemn public nakedness, probably for the reasons explained below. But, on the other, those individuals and groups who are liberal in thought positively embrace nudity as a desirable state both publicly and privately.

When portraying the human body in its natural state we, as artists, are forced to consider the possible attitudes of those we hope to entertain, educate, impress or arouse. Visual artists are constrained more by simple taste and the likely location of their works than by other considerations. So, it's fine to portray the full frontal display if it's confined to the art gallery, where people go by choice and must know that they may be faced with such sights.

'I tell you, Ethel. She was showing everything. And I do mean everything. I mean, I didn't know where to look!'
'I bet Bert knew where to look, though, Gloria, didn't he?'
'Certainly did. I hauled him out of there as quick as I could.'

However, if a pictorial or plastic portrayal is to be on general public view in the street or similar location, the display is normally neutered to some extent. Erect penises and hairless and/or detailed vulva are generally frowned on and therefore avoided. And, in advertising, the airbrush becomes the weapon of choice against truth.

In writing, we have the double-edged benefit of the genre and the sub-genre. If we want to indulge in sexual fantasy, we can do so with little restriction under the umbrella of 'erotica'. That's fine. But what about the serious writer who wants to portray the natural in a work of a more literary nature? That it can be done and even appreciated is demonstrated by the successful publication of such works as Lawrence's 'Lady Chatterley's Lover'. Though even such well-established works as this are vilified, banned, and even burned in some of the more extreme communities.

What is difficult, is the portrayal of nudity devoid of sex, though not of gender. It's as if the very introduction of nudity is considered a preparation for sex. So, the heroine who naturally chooses to do her housework free of the encumbrance of clothing is inevitably, in the minds of most readers, prepared and ready for a sexual encounter, either alone or with some expected partner. The man who prefers to swim naked in the private lake is subject, in the minds of the readers, to some expected sexual act yet to be described. In writing, as in life, it's almost impossible to remove the general association between nudity and sex.

I started this feature with the question: 'Can humans see nudity in art as purely aesthetic?' My conclusion is that, in most cases, the answer is 'No', which is a shame. The human body is possibly the most beautiful living form in existence. Of course, as a human, I'm biased in favour of the human form, and in particular, as a man, of the female human form. That's a biological essential. Does that mean, however, I'm incapable of appreciating that form without the association of the possibility of sexual activity with it? Does it mean I look at a picture of a naked woman and always wish to have sex with her? If I study a piece of sculpture am I seeking a way to enter it? As a woman, is it possible to watch a nude man dance or exercise and see him only as a beautiful form? To what extent are desire and arousal associated with nudity? Is the association inevitable?

I suppose, what I'm trying to discover is whether it's possible for us to view or read about nudity from a neutral position in which sexual interest plays no part. And the answer appears to be that we are hard-wired to associate nudity with sex. There are exceptions, of course. To the normal mind, for instance, the nude child, corpse, and victim of torture or rape, all evoke emotions far away from sexual desire. To the heterosexual, nude depictions of the same gender can be viewed dispassionately and to those who love the same gender, the nude of the opposite is something devoid of sexual attraction.

So, if I want to make my heroine both attractive and nude, I must accept that she will be viewed in a sexual manner, even when that aspect isn't intended. I must be aware that my male nude hero will excite female, and some male, readers in ways not necessarily meant. This natural response therefore challenges the writer to portray such characters with care if they are to convey the image intended. It makes the process more demanding and difficult. Perhaps that's why so few writers are willing to step into this territory, or to turn all nudity into eroticism. It's a shame, but it seems inevitable.

Why my interest? Well, I'm writing an epic fantasy set in an invented land with invented history and customs. For reasons too complex to discuss here, I've made the major religion of that land one where worship and nudity go hand in hand. It's been difficult to convey the necessary spiritual aspect without unintentionally causing some level of sexual arousal in my readers. But it looks as though I'll have to simply accept that such is inevitable and make the best of it.

I'd appreciate any input from my readers here. Suggestions, ideas, arguments are all welcome.

#####

My View of How Nudity Became Associated with Guilt and Sex.

The vast majority of indigenous peoples living in the tropics when first discovered by western explorers, lived as naked tribes, though some wore minimal cover. Those of us born in less friendly climates initially took to clothing as protection against the cold, since our skin no longer bore the hair of our earlier ancestors. There are different theories as to how we became the naked ape, and I'm not intending to discuss those here but I'll point you in the direction of The Descent of Woman, by Elaine Morgan, for one of the more credible explanations. (For a review of this excellent text follow this link). The simple fact, however, that we were and are, to all intents and purposes, hairless made clothing a necessity for survival.

It's likely that two different, though related, causes made us consider nakedness in public a bad thing. As long as we lived in small tribes that were extended families, sexual availability and display of gender were no problem. Once, however, we began to organise into larger communities, constant nakedness, with it's inevitable consequence of stimulus and availability, made some sort of cover essential. Otherwise people would be at it all the time, no work would get done and the women would be perpetually pregnant. At about the same time as larger communities developed, so also, as a consequence, the social contract began to be formed in a rudimentary way. Those who laboured to provide food, hunting weapons and other social needs, were defended by others who formed protection against the raids of other similar communities.

Thus, in a nutshell, was formed the basis of modern society, with leaders overseeing producers. That it all got considerably out of hand early on is a matter for a different discussion. However, as a consequence of their positions of power and all the benefits that brought, leaders needed some device to stop workers from rebelling. Thus religion came about. Early religion was cleverly combined with what were, at the time, plausible answers to otherwise unfathomable mysteries. Leaders formed associations between the powers of their gods, the invented afterlife, and behaviour in everyday life as a means of controlling their people.
In the early Abrahamic religions that now rule over most of the world the concept of guilt was introduced as a means of controlling a subjugated and resentful population. It was a convenient way of making those who served into a flock that was, to some extent, self-governing. Introduce the idea that selfish and anti-social actions will eventually result in an eternal afterlife spent feeding the flames of some sort of hell and you have a powerful tool of control.

Once guilt was established, it was a relatively simple matter, using fear and ignorance, to persuade people that reward was a divine matter used to benefit goodness, whilst punishment was reserved for those who were bad. However, it suited those in control to determine what was perceived as good and bad. It also suited them to have degrees of such qualities determined by the individual's position in the hierarchy that was the natural outcome of developing society.

So it was that a natural state, nakedness, became frowned on in public, even though such nakedness might be beneficial for reasons entirely separate from sexual activity. Many activities are actually easier whilst unencumbered by clothing; Labouring in the tropics and fishing in the shallows are obvious examples. And the relatively recent introduction of special clothing to cover us whilst we swim is a natural progression of the guilt theme.

Having established control through guilt, the leaders then discovered that they'd shot themselves in the feet. Nudity is the preferred state for sexual activity. Sexual activity is enhanced by power, which we all know acts as an aphrodisiac (in itself a matter fraught with questions). So, leaders were now in a state where they'd made clothing essential, even in places where it was really unnecessary. But they wished to have their women (by this time it was almost exclusively men who were in power, of course) naked and available for sex. Thus came about the introduction of revealing wear, especially for women, in those situations where it was permitted. Not because women necessarily wished to be on display but because their men required it.

The nature of the guilt association allowed the hypocrisy of partial cover to become an acceptable alternative to nudity. Partial cover, with its promise of the hidden and its drawing of the eye to the most sexually attractive parts, became more alluring than actual nudity, for many men. Clothes for women, initially, and more recently for men, except when there's a deliberate intention to make them plain and unattractive, are designed to draw the eye of the opposite gender. This is the hypocrisy of guilt born of religion. In hiding the sexual attractiveness of the naked genders, those in power devised a system where the clothed genders are, if anything, considered even more attractive.

Many of you, especially those with religious sympathies, will utterly disagree with what I've said here. Of course you will: you've been indoctrinated from birth by ideas that are now so ingrained that they're integral to your being. But a logical examination of the reality must conclude that what I've suggested as the development of sexual guilt as a socially protective device imposed for reasons of power is at least as credible as any other theory. The topic needs a full length book to develop properly, but those with open minds will understand my drift.
####

Another silly question for you to ponder: He's been in the jungle all his life, so why doesn't Tarzan have a beard?


Enhanced by Zemanta

Zemanta User, Interviewed.

If you're unfamiliar with Zemanta, let me explain that it's an add-on available for blogs, websites and emails, that selects relevant associated articles and pictures to enliven your content. I was recently interviewed by the providers. Here's a link to the interview: http://www.zemanta.com/blog/zemanta-power-user-stuart-aken-2/
 And, for evidence of the sort of help it can give, just scan through some of my posts. I use my own photos for some but Zemanta has provided others and many links to articles relevant to my topics and content. Certainly worth investigating if you're a blogger, website owner or send emails that might be enhanced.

Sunday 18 March 2012

Sylvia L. Ramsey, Interviewed.


Regular visitors will know that I ran a series of interviews on this blog, mostly with indie authors, and that, after 110 of these, I decided to give the series a rest. I haven't changed my mind, yet. But Sylvia's book is an exception because all proceeds are to go to charity and I support such generosity. So, here goes:

Hi Sylvia. I last interviewed you in January 2011, and you'd already published a number of books and had numerous short stories and poems appear in various literary journals. I gather you've a new book coming out. Would you tell us something about it, please?

Hello Stuart.  Yes, I have a new book, Traveling a Rocky Road with Love, Faith and Guts. It is my fourth book,  and it was just released a couple of weeks ago. My newest book is a memoir, Traveling a Rocky Road with Love, Faith and Guts, was inspired by a young man that has some very serious heart problems, and all the people I have met over the years as a teacher, mentor and a bladder cancer survivor. I have tried my best to encourage them, and to give them hope. To not give up on themselves or life. As I have traveled along life’s highway, I keep running into people who have let the rocks that have been thrown in their life’s road giving up on themselves, or life in general. The truth is that life is harsh, and it is not like the movies that give a false impression that it is smooth sailing. Being the hero that toughs it out and keeps on regardless of the situation is difficult, but with faith, it can be accomplished. It often takes a backbone, humor and a wishbone to survive it all.

Because of this, I decided to write a book to share my life’s experiences so that it may inspire someone to come back fighting when life knocks them down. The book is a journey though time from childhood to mature adulthood. The stories and poems in this book reflect the lows and highs of life. The loving memories, the hardships and the things we learn as we travel the road of life. It covers an abusive mother who had mental problems because of being abused as a child, childhood polio, a rocky marriage with a husband who was often abusive, the role of caregiving, death and grief, coping with bladder cancer, asthma, losing a home and more. Therefore, to not to scare you off with gloom and doom, there are funny stories along the way and an ending that I never dreamed would happen. My hope is that the book will bring about understanding to others, and be inspiring to even more. Our journey in life has a purpose, finding it is often the most difficult task of all.

You've had a number of serious problems to cope with in life; one of your supports through all this has been something you call 'faith'. As you know, I have a deep personal distrust of religious faith. Would you describe what you mean by 'faith'?

Regardless of what you believe or do not believe as far as "religious" faith is concerned, you must have faith in yourself that you can somehow overcome the various things that happen in life. Some call it perseverance and determination to not allow these things to conquer your spirit. I try never to use the word can't. I prefer to use the words: I may not know how, but I can learn. I will try, I may not be the absolute best at whatever it is...but I will try to do and be the best that is possible for me. Who knows what your best is unless you keep on trying. Giving up always equals failure. 

We've had similar responses, in one regard, to health issues that have come our way. In your case, research into bladder cancer has benefitted by your active support. I've done what I can for ME/CFS research in my quiet way. What drives you to continue with this support?

I know how important support is from others who have traveled the same road. Bladder cancer is one that has little in spite of the fact that it ranked 5th in prevalence. I have made it a personal goal for the past fifteen years to do my best to change this. When I speak with people who have just been diagnosed, I can hear the fear in their voices. They need someone to talk to that has experienced the same thing. They need someone to be able to talk to about their situation who understands. That was not available when I was diagnosed, or when I had my radical cystcectomy. Therefore, I decided to do what I had been taught as a child by my father: "I may not be able to do everything, but I can do something."

There are many ways in which individuals respond to adversity. Some fight, becoming aggressive and loud, some give up and succumb to whatever ails them, others take up the challenge in a more thoughtful and positive way. What do you think makes you respond so positively to the hardships that life's thrown your way?

I had two of the best role models, one was my father and the other was my grandmother. Another thing was my experience with polio at the age of four, and the time I spent in the hospital in a large ward with about sixteen other children. My bed was across from a little girl who had been in a fire, and her body was burned so badly. She never spoke the entire time I was there. There were only occasional moans. There were so many children there that were much worse off than me, that I could not feel sorry for myself. I wanted to get well and help others even at that time. I heard about the Red Cross and their drive to make people aware of polio. I started by helping to collect money for this cause as soon as I was able. I was one of the poster children. I talk about all this in my book.

So far, we've talked about you as the person. I'd like to know a little more about you as a writer. What made you decide to write, as opposed to any other creative activity?

Actually, writing isn't the only creative activity I indulge in, I also paint and sculpt. I love all the arts, and have participated in them. I directed a theatre program for sixteen years. I taught art and theatre courses. As far as my writing goes, that began when I was nine-years-old. I began writing news and feature articles for a small town newspaper in Southeast Missouri at the age of nine. Because of the nurturing and encouragement by the news editor, I developed a love and a need to write.
By the time I was working on my graduate degree, several of my poems, short stories and feature articles had been published. Since that time, over one hundred of my short stories and poems have found their way into literary magazines. I have been a featured poet in several literary journals over the years.

Do you have a favourite author? If so, who is it and what attracts you to their work?

That is a difficult question to answer because I have favorites in a variety of genre. In poetry, there are three, Frost, Millay, and a poem by Brecht, "To Posterity". Shakespeare's,  "King Lear" is one of my favorite plays. I read a lot of different types of books, and genre...so, it is an answer I do not have.

Do you have any advice for beginners in the field?

Keep writing, get as much feedback as you can get. Write enough to find your own voice. Listen to the feedback you get, but do not lose your voice. It is sometimes like painting, you may paint 60 or even a 100 before you get a good one. 

So many would-be writers have taken advantage of the ready availability of digital self-publishing, without first learning how to actually write. Have you anything to say about the proliferation of badly-written indie books?

I think this is something that comes with the territory of the new era. It can be unfortunate for the readers, and the good authors. Here again, I feel that before one publishes any work one needs some good critiques and to polish their work. 

When writing this particular book, how did you go about the actual process?

I was inspired to write this book because of seeing others give up on themselves, rather than do what was necessary to succeed. I began to write a rough draft lay-out of what I wanted to say, or put in the book. Then I wrote a draft of the book that was fairly brief. Before I continued, I asked a friend who is a professional writer to read it and tell me if I were wasting my time. He knows I respect his opinion, and I know he would be honest in his responses. I had my doubts because writing a memoir is so personal, and I really did not know if it would be something others would want to read. He liked where I was going with the book and encouraged me to continue. He, also, made suggestions that were a great help in how I developed the book. I began writing it once more. He read it again, and offered more suggestions. I did a re-write and added more. At that point, I was ready to get it proofed, and the next step what to make the required corrections. I was ready to make a decision on what to do with it. I weighed my options, and decided that since the proceeds from the book sales were going to the American Bladder Cancer Society plus I would have to market the book anyway to self-publish it.

You can find out more about me and or purchase the book at:
Purchase the book:
In the United States:
In the UK:

Website:
Blog:
The American Bladder Cancer Society

Enhanced by Zemanta

Saturday 17 March 2012

Is Piracy Just a Form of Petty Theft?

English: Flag of pirate Edward England Polski:...
Image via Wikipedia

Honest Questions From a Simple Man.

This discussion follows on from last week's debate about honesty. Here's the link, if you want to visit that first: http://stuartaken.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/is-copying-same-as-theft.html .

Theo: We'd reached the conclusion that you'd be prepared to pay what you saw as a reasonable amount for things like CDs, DVDs and books. But that it was acceptable to steal these objects if they were overpriced.

Dave: I wouldn't put it like that.

Theo: How would you put it?

Dave: Look, if you feel you're being ripped off, especially by a big organisation, you want to get your own back. It's natural, isn't it?

Theo: So, what you're saying is that theft of small items from large organisations that overcharge for the goods is a legitimate activity?

Dave: Except I wouldn't call it theft.

Theo: So, we're looking at semantics here, are we?

Dave: No. That's just playing with words.

Theo: Well, I'm trying to understand. Tell me what you'd call it, then we can move on.

Dave: It's redistribution, isn't it? Like Robin Hood. He stole from the rich and gave it to the poor.

Theo: It's interesting that you still use the term 'stole' here but seem reluctant to use the same word for what we're discussing.

Dave: Yeah, well he redistributed wealth by taking things from the rich and giving them to the poor.

Theo: And these things he took were essential to the welfare of those he gave them to?

Dave: It was money mostly, and jewellery they could sell. Hell, these people were starving and the fat cats were taking more and more in taxes from them, so they could live in luxury.

Theo: So, this mythical act of redistribution was to do with inequality in society, where the differential in wealth was so great that those on the bottom were starving and those at the top were living lives of excess?

Dave: That's right. Social engineering, they call it.

Theo: Okay. I can see the justice and fairness in such a scheme. When authority won't do a job for society, society needs to do the job itself. And that seems perfectly fine when we're talking of the necessities of life. It starts to seem like envy, however, if we apply the same rule to things that aren't essential. We all need food, heat, shelter, etc., to live a reasonable life. But we don't actually 'need' the items we've been discussing. These things are extras; 'wants' rather than 'needs'. Would you agree?

Dave: If you put it like that…

Theo: Your argument is based on price, which you see as unfair. If we extend it logically, you could use the same argument to justify stealing someone's Lamborghini, because it's an expensive car as opposed you your own hatchback. Would you steal a car for that reason?

Dave: Of course not.

Theo: So, we come back to where you set the level for what you see as acceptable taking without paying. And I think we've already covered that ground and found that it's a subjective decision based on personal judgements about the perceived value of the object coupled with personal income. So, a book sold for £10.00 ($15.84) might be okay for many people but one sold for £20.00 ($31.68), especially in digital form, might be considered overpriced?

Dave: Like I said, it's a rip off. It costs almost nothing to produce a digital book, once the thing's been written.

Theo: Again, that's a subjective judgement. And, in any case, you're not paying only for the object itself, but for the time it takes for that object to be created. Let me tell you about writing as a profession. The average novel in the UK sells fewer than 2,000 copies. The author gets around 10% in royalties. That means that for a book that sells for £10.00, the author might make a total of £2,000.00. Most novels take around one to two years to complete. That's just for the actual writing. Of course, the process starts a long time before the writing does, since a novel is often the condensation of a lifetime's experiences. I have to ask whether you'd be prepared to have your time valued at the pittance the author receives. I mean, do the maths. I think you'll find that this overpaid artist is getting less than £1.00 ($1.58) per hour for his time. Not what I'd call a huge return, would you? Even the book priced at £20.00 earns him only £2.00 ($3.17) per hour.

Dave: Well, what about authors like J.K.Rowling; they earn millions.

Theo: For every best-seller, there are thousands who sell only a few hundred copies, if they're lucky.

Dave: They should write better books, then.

Theo: You'd like your choice to be reduced to only those books that everyone wants to read? You'd like a diet of the same all the time, would you? Just because something isn't as popular as something else, it doesn't render it less valuable, just less marketable, which is a different thing. We all have, amongst our collections, works by what are called 'niche' artists, and they often prove to be our favourite pieces, even though they've never reached the notice of the more general population.

Dave: As long as it's easy to copy digital stuff, it'll be copied without paying for it.

Theo: So, because it's possible, it's acceptable, is it?

Dave: It's going to happen. Get used to it.

Theo: It's possible to kill with a knife. Does that make murder acceptable? It's possible to duplicate almost everything with modern technology. Piracy exists across the board in manufactured goods. Usually the pirated goods are made by what amounts to slave labour in developing countries and the industry often supports terrorists and criminal gangs. The attitude that piracy is not only acceptable but should be encouraged is responsible for financing the worst type of criminal and terrorist activity. That must make the purchasers of such goods so proud.

Dave: That's not the same thing.

Theo: Looks very much like it to me. And what are the consequences of pirating on those who produce the original works? The really talented, the brightest stars, will find different fields, somewhere they can operate and be properly paid for their efforts and the original field will be impoverished as a result. Simply because some people are unwilling to pay a reasonable price for something because they perceive it as being too expensive when provided in a digital medium, which they can easily access. The argument that it's easy to make and reproduce isn't a justification for theft. Any more than the profiteering by the industry giants is justified. What we need is a more mature and honest appraisal of the reality of the situation. We need the pirates to be honest about their activities, to accept that they're taking the bread from the mouths of those who create. And we need the large distributors to accept that they must re-examine their attitude to the sale of such items. But, in the meantime, the people who suffer as a result of the actions of both sides are the creators of the very things that both sides value. Doesn't look like justice or fairness to me, and those amongst the piracy clan who claim to be doing society a favour should perhaps examine their motives a little more closely, don't you think?

Dave: So you're saying I should pay for every CD, DVD or book I want?

Theo: It's always all or nothing, isn't it? How about a compromise? We all share things we enjoy, and that's a great thing. No author minds his readers lending or even giving away the books they've bought to friends, etc. No author objects to the resale of second hand books. This is all perfectly normal. What isn't acceptable is the mass sharing and redistribution of free copies on those file-sharing sites that enable such activity. On that level, the whole idea of sharing simply becomes mass theft. You'd be perfectly happy to share your evening meal with a friend or two who popped in unexpectedly, but you'd be a little miffed if the whole neighbourhood suddenly descended on you and expected to be fed, wouldn't you? That's the difference between personal sharing and the sharing that happens in the digital file-sharing community. And, no matter how they dress it up, how they distort the reality to justify their activities, they are acting as thieves and stealing from the very people whose work they admire and desire. No matter how you dress it up; taking something that's offered for sale and not paying for it is theft.

Dave; You're a hard man, Theo.

Theo: I hope I'm simply a fair man, Dave. Fair and honest.

What do you think? I'd value your opinions. I've been involved in discussions like this with those who think they're some sort of latter day Robin Hoods. Here's a link to one such discussion, if you're interested in further thoughts from both sides of the argument: http://digg.com/newsbar/topnews/american_isps_to_launch_massive_copyright_spying_scheme_on_july_12_the_raw_story

This is the last in the current series of ethical discussions, as they're too time-consuming to allow me to do the real work of writing. But I intend to return to the idea in the future. Let me know what you think. I really do value your input and ideas.


Enhanced by Zemanta

Thursday 15 March 2012

7 Ways to Improve Your Grammar and Impress Readers.

Cover of "Eats, Shoots and Leaves: The Ze...
Cover via Amazon

Some aspects of English grammar create more confusion and resultant errors than others. I get far too het up about them. But, there you are; I guess I care a little too much about the way writer's constantly break rules they often don't appear to know exist. However, in common with George Orwell, I'd rather all the rules were broken than have to endure an ugly sentence. But, in order to break rules effectively, you have to know what they are.
So, here's a list of seven of the most common errors and some suggested solutions.

1.      Contractions.
We all speak using contractions. But when we write them down, they seem to cause problems. Here are some of the common pitfalls.
They're, you're, we're; all contractions of the pronoun used with 'are'. So, they are becomes they're, etc. The most common error occurs when your, the possessive pronoun, is substituted for you're, the contraction. The only sensible way to avoid the error is to write out the meaning in full and then apply the contraction if it's appropriate. Example:  This is a chance to improve your writing. Here, your refers to the writing and the context makes it plain that it is the writing that belongs to you. The possessive pronoun is therefore the correct usage. However; If you're going to improve the way you write, you need to be aware of how grammar works. Here, you're can be replaced by you are, so the contraction is the correct form. If your were used, it would make no sense, since there's nothing belonging to anyone in the sentence.

2.      Homonyms.
This leads quite naturally onto the homonyms, those words that sound alike but have different spellings and/or different meanings. We've looked at your and you're but there are many examples in English and they confuse even those raised with the language, so it's hardly a surprise if foreign language speakers have problems.
They're, their, there; we're, wear, where, were; bow(bend from the waist), bough; buy, by, bye; row (a boat), roe; tyre, tire; tear (cry), tier; peer, pier; pear, pair; stare, stair. A non-comprehensive list of some common homonyms. These won't be picked up by your spell-checker, because the spelling is correct. Only you, as the writer, can determine whether you've used the right word, though. And, if in doubt, please resort to that invaluable tool of the author; a reference book called a 'dictionary'. And, as a means of getting those of you who rarely open this writers' bible to do just that, I'm not going to provide further help here on this one.

3.      Apostrophe 's'.
Lynn Truss wrote a wonderful short book on this, and other, grammatical pitfalls. If you haven't read 'Eats Shoots and Leaves', shame on you.
The apostrophe 's' identifies the word as a possessive and is often confused with the plural form. So we have the field-side signs inviting the driver to 'Stop and Pick Your Own Potatoe's'. Generally, it's not clear which of the potatoe's belongings we're being invited to choose. That's because it's a simple plural and the apostrophe is redundant, incorrect, wrong, unnecessary and generally no more than the product of a confused and ill-educated mind.
It's not helpful that such worthy stores as Waterstone's, a chain of shops selling books for heaven's sake, decided to ditch the apostrophe in their name. Why? It hardly causes confusion or extra work for the sign-writer.
Please remember to ask yourself the question, when unsure about the insertion of an apostrophe: 'Does this word indicate the ownership of something (apostrophe) or is it simply stating the plural case (no apostrophe). Really quite simple, you see?

4.      Tenses.
I can get quite tense about tenses. Even journalists, particularly TV reporters, can mix these up and it really sets my teeth on edge. Reports tell us that '…the injured player was took off the pitch.' We all know, don't we, that it's '...the injured player was taken off…'? It's not difficult; or, perhaps it is, is it? And then there's the wonderful, '…all thought the boy done good.' What? Surely, even the most basic English education explains that we should say, '…all thought the boy had done well.' or, '…all thought the boy did well,' or, perhaps, '…the boy did a good job.' doesn't it? And then there's the confusion that persists about the use of such forms as 'spun/span, swum/swam, and hung/hang'. 'The spider had spun a web across the corner.' 'The car span out of control.' 'Beryl swam across the current to reach the other side.' 'Georgina has swum the Channel on three occasions.' 'I hung up my coat.' 'Will you hang up my coat, please?' But, 'The killer was hanged for murder.'
English is noted for its irregular forms. I could go on for a very long time here, but I don't wish to bore you. If in doubt about these things, buy, borrow or steal a copy of one of the many 'English Usage' guides. I use Fowler's, the Oxford Guide and Partridge's Usage and Abusage. All worth the few quid/dollars you need to spend to get it right, don't you think?

5.      Plural or Singular?
There is often some uncertainty about whether a plural or singular verb is correct usage in sentences where there appears to be more than one subject. e.g. Bread and water is too good for that prisoner. I suspect most people would agree with the singular 'is' rather than the plural 'are' here, even though we have two subjects; 'bread' and 'water'. The 'and' here engages both subjects and combines them into a single entity that is understood by readers to be a combined subject. Therefore, the singular form is correct. In any case, it sounds better. If you don't believe me, try reading both versions aloud and you'll see how the plural effort makes you squirm with discomfort.
The above is one example of a long list of similar combined subjects, where two or more terms that form the subject are, or may be, understood to be expressed as a single entity. 'Cheese and wine', 'short back and sides', 'rape and murder', 'love and kisses' and 'apple pie and custard' are all examples of such combinations. When in doubt about usage, it is the meaning that should take precedence over the form. Read it aloud and hear it; the correct version should be clear that way.
English, however, being the complex language it is, has another trick up its sleeve regarding plural and singular forms. When we write about collective or group nouns, the decision about whether to use them as plural or singular forms again arises. And the solution depends on meaning. So, you might write, The gang were all at the crime scene. When describing the actions of the individuals making up the group. But you'd write, The gang was first to arrive. When examining the action of the group as a whole.
Meaning is the paramount determiner here. I hope I've cleared rather than muddied the waters. But, if you're still unsure, let me recommend an excellent piece on this in Thomas Parrish's The Grouchy Grammarian.

6.      Dangling Modifiers.
What? A 'dangling modifier' is a phrase that's intended to explain about one subject but actually relates to another entirely, or even to none at all. We've all come across, though hopefully not written, such sentences as; Walking into the library, Karen's list of books befuddled the girl at the counter. Hardly surprising! The poor girl could rarely have witnessed a list of books walking at any other time. It was, of course, Karen who was walking, not her list of books. The sentence needs to be re-written differently; Walking into the library, Karen approached the girl at the counter and befuddled her with her list of books. Not brilliant, but it says what it means. The opening phrase now relates to the rest of the sentence.
Another? Having less knowledge than needed, the teacher sent Jones on a course designed to increase his awareness of the subject. One wonders why the teacher should have less knowledge than necessary and then send the pupil away for improvement. But, of course, the writer meant that the pupil had less knowledge and that the teacher was intent on increasing it by sending him on a course. So, the sentence would have been better written as; Having less knowledge than needed, Jones was sent on a course designed to increase his awareness of the subject. Of course, this sentence doesn't tell us that it was the teacher who sent Jones. But I'll leave it to you to modify the sentence or add another, to include that aspect.
Please don't leave your modifiers dangling; someone might come along and cut them off!

7.      Which, That or Who?
There has been, is, and will be much debate on this issue. When to use which, that or who, because, it seems, it isn't as straightforward as it may appear. The common belief is that who is used for people and that for things and never vice-versa. The which question is not commonly held to be so clear cut.
Please note; I said 'the common belief'. That doesn't make it the right one, of course.
The fact is that that can be used for people, under certain circumstances. For instance, it's perfectly correct to say, Of those members that were in attendance, all were in favour of the amendment. Similarly, it is fine to say, Are you the one that said it was my fault?
However, who should be reserved only for people. It's true that certain journals have, of late, allowed the use of who when referring to an animal, whose gender is known. But this isn't generally accepted usage and is probably best avoided.
Most commentators will agree with the above, but some will not. Because of this, it's probably best for you to decide for yourself which you will use; be consistent, though. Personally, I'd avoid using who for an animal, except in the case where I was deliberately anthropomorphising the creature referred to. I would also not use that for people, as illustrated in the sentences above. Although such usage isn't incorrect, I find it awkward and impersonal and would use who or whom in preference.
So, to the which issue. I'll make a bald statement, with which you can agree or not. Which is never, under any circumstances, used for people. The only which that refers to people is witch, which is an entirely different affair. Depending on the witch in question, I'd avoid the affair, unless of course, the witch has placed you under a spell. Which is used exclusively for inanimate objects and qualities. So, you might say, The tree, which blew down in the storm, is now dead. But you would, hopefully, never say, The robber, which took all your clothes, is a foul asset stripper. regardless of how you might feel about him. You would, of course, always use who when referring to said brigand.
I could go on at length about restrictive and non-restrictive clauses, relative pronouns and other grammatical niceties, but it isn't my purpose here to go into great depth. I'll leave that to Fowler and his ilk, to whom I refer you for such depth of treatment. My purpose is merely to raise awareness of the issues, to point out that there are issues and that it is incumbent on the writer who wishes to impress and learn the trade that such issues should be examined and taken seriously.

So, hopefully, I've provided you with food for thought and whetted your appetite for further research. If you don't own any of the grammar guides I've mentioned, I urge you to add them to your reference library.


Enhanced by Zemanta

The Amulet of Samarkand, by Jonathan Stroud, Reviewed.


Balancing humour with the elements of a thriller is a difficult task to carry off, but Jonathan Stroud does it with style in The Amulet of Samarkand. What's more, he does it without expletives or sexual content, so you can happily encourage your youngsters to read this story.
Set in England sometime in a near future, it depicts a society in which the rich and powerful are all magicians. Politicians, in particular, are shown to be ruthless, manipulative, selfish and totally lacking in conscience; much, in fact, the way they appear to most of us in reality. The author uses his considerable writing gifts to mock the powerful and portray them as people who use their positions to get what they want without reference to the general public, who are treated with contempt by this society.
The main protagonists ought to be unsympathetic characters, but the reader warms to both the young, inexperienced, clever and vengeful apprentice magician, Nathaniel, and the wicked, conniving, powerful and devious demon, Bartimaeus, he conjours from 'the Other Place' to help him achieve his ambitions. Told from the first person, by Bartimaeus and the third person viewpoint of Nathaniel, the story develops plenty of impetus as the writer takes us into a world of ambition, greed, danger and treachery.
The humour is mostly of the type that brings a smile or a nod of admiration, but there's also the occasional belly laugh. And, I suspect, younger readers, particularly teenage boys will find plenty that will make them laugh out loud here.
It's a well-written story, with plenty of twists and turns and building drama leading to the inevitable denouement, which provides a satisfying and action-packed climax. The characters, even the minor roles, are written with an attention that allows the reader to form empathy and develop many other emotional responses appropriate to the different personalities.
I thoroughly enjoyed this work of great imagination and I applaud the author's method of bringing reader's attention to the depth of corruption in politics without preaching or ramming messages down throats. Humour is undoubtedly the most effective tool in the satirist's armoury and Jonathan Stroud uses it to great effect.
I have no hesitation in recommending this damn good read to all and sundry.

Enhanced by Zemanta