writing

New York Times: Imagine books without their authors

This entry was posted in Commentary Writing and tagged writing on by

“All you want is production without men who’re able to produce, isn’t it?”

In Atlas Shrugged, Henry Rearden asks this of a gang of politicians and bureaucrats trying to foist an insane scheme on him. Some people say Rand created a caricature. But recently, the New York Times made the erasure of creators explicit with an ad presenting “imagining Harry Potter without its creator” in a positive light. Perhaps the Times people think books are created by a “Fiat Librum” spell requiring no work. (“Fiat Librum” is probably bad Latin. Wizarding Word magic is built on bad Latin.) It’s magical thinking.

The suggestion is reminiscent of Barack Obama’s “You didn’t built that.” Denying credit to creators relieves the beneficiaries of any sense that they owe them anything, even acknowledgement.
(more…)

Writing about Ukraine

This entry was posted in Writer ethics Writing and tagged Russia Ukraine writing on by

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has us all very concerned, and anyone who writes about it for publication needs to write responsibly. Here are a few thoughts on the subject. I’m addressing writers in the USA; most of it applies everywhere, but I’m writing with Americans in mind.

Beyond assuming that you agree the invasion is outrageous, I’m not saying what position you should take. (If you don’t think it’s outrageous, you aren’t in my target audience.) These are general points regardless of what you think people should do.
(more…)

Writers: Know the tools of your trade

This entry was posted in Techniques Writing and tagged grammar writing on by

No one would try to be a carpenter without knowing how to use a hammer and saw. No one would claim to be a software developer without the ability to write syntactically correct code that (usually) does what it’s supposed to. But it’s astonishing how many people on writers’ forums show a basic lack of ability to use their language.

As a writer, you should understand spelling, verb tenses, sentence structure, agreement, and so on. You should have a good vocabulary and know what the right word is. You can break the rules when it’s appropriate, but you should know when you’re breaking them and why. You should know the difference between “rein” and “reign,” between “lose” and “loose.”

Grammar checkers won’t save a bad writer. The best of them are excessively nitpicking, ridiculously permissive, or both in turns. They’re valuable for catching mistakes, but you have to know which of their recommendations are valid.
(more…)

Prescriptivism vs. descriptivism

This entry was posted in Techniques Writing and tagged usage writing on by

Attitudes toward changes in a language range between two poles. The prescriptivist says words have fixed definitions, and using them in ways that aren’t in the dictionary is misuse. The descriptivist says that words mean whatever people choose them to mean. Few people take a pure position at one end or the other. Prescriptivists face the fact that dictionaries change. Descriptivists can’t treat every neologism they hear as part of the language if they expect people to understand each other. The debate is over how much legitimacy a word needs before it’s considered standard. Words pass through the stage of slang or jargon before they reach full citizenship. Some words don’t go beyond that status, and they don’t have to. Professions need their jargon and subcultures need their slang, and they don’t have to impose it on the whole linguistic community.

Linguistic change isn’t something that a mysterious Sprachgeist causes. It’s the product of the users’ choices. Prescriptivists exert a drag on changes, and that can be good. If the language changes too fast, it becomes less precise. No one’s sure whether a word means what it always meant or it’s become something else. New words are necessary to convey new concepts, but they should prove their worth before getting wide adoption. Some words, like “nice,” have changed so many times that no one’s sure what they mean, except by context and tone of voice.
(more…)

Non-compete clauses for freelancers

This entry was posted in Writing Writing as business and tagged contracts law writing on by

Recently I got into a Reddit discussion that included a question about a non-compete clause for a freelance writer. Such clauses have legitimate uses, but broadly written ones can be nasty. They can damage a writer’s ability to earn an income. I’m not an expert in this area, so I’ve gone looking for reliable material.

PublishLawyer.com has an informative article, primarily addressing fiction writers. It quotes a “typical provision”:

During the term of this Agreement, Author has not prepared or published, and shall not prepare or publish, or participate in the preparation or publication of any work that directly competes with the sales of the Work.

(more…)

Progress on Spells of War

This entry was posted in My writing Writing and tagged fantasy fiction Spells of War writing on by

This week, I’ve started rewriting the first draft of Spells of War. The first eight chapters went pretty quickly, without any huge changes. The biggest departure from the first draft, though, is that the action will now span 1556-1557, instead of all taking place in 1556. Things just got too crammed against the approach of winter and Ramadan. With the new timeline, the mages on each side will be able to develop more weapons and train the Landsknechte and Janissaries respectively in their use. This means adding material about what happens over the winter without letting the story drag.

A character who shows up late in the first draft will make his appearance earlier. This will let me build up his role in the story more effectively.

I’ll be putting out a call for beta readers before long, perhaps in early January.

A review of The Magic Battery

This entry was posted in My writing Writing and tagged books magic battery writing on by

Author Walter Donway has posted an enthusiastic review of The Magic Battery on the Savvy Street website. I love not just his praise, but his understanding of what I was aiming for.

Full disclosure: I recently posted a favorable review of Donway’s Retaking College Hill, but there was no tit-for-tat agreement between us. He emailed me a draft of the review last week, asking just for factual corrections.

Use the right statistic

This entry was posted in Commentary Writing and tagged statistics writing on by

Mark Twain talked about “lies, damned lies, and statistics.” Lying with statistics isn’t always intentional; sometimes a writer doesn’t understand their meaning or applicability.

Recently I saw a news article on the COVID-19 infection rate in northern New Hampshire. It reported a higher positivity rate than in previous weeks. That doesn’t tell us anything about whether infections are increasing or decreasing, though. If the positivity rate goes up, it could mean one of several things:

  1. More people are infected.
  2. More of the people who are infected are getting tested.
  3. Fewer people who aren’t infected are getting tested.

(more…)

What is irony, and how can writers use it?

This entry was posted in Techniques Writing and tagged irony usage writing on by

Irony is one of those things we know when we see it, but it’s hard to pin down if you’re asked to explain. Merriam-Webster gives two definitions: (1) the use of words that mean the opposite of what you really think especially in order to be funny. (2) a situation that is strange or funny because things happen in a way that seems to be the opposite of what you expected.
(more…)

Abusing the nominative 2

This entry was posted in Commentary Writing and tagged grammar writing on by

Alexander James Adams has a song which is quite nice yet makes me grate my teeth. Its refrain is “There’s only the music between you and I.” An occasional grammatical violation in a song is OK, but one that occurs in every verse is painful. There are plenty of good rhymes for “me.”

When a pronoun follows a preposition, it has to be in the accusative case, also called the objective case. “With me.” “To them.” “Behind her.” The favorite grammatical error of snobs is to use the nominative case instead.
(more…)