Not when there is a $10,000 scholarship for a good essay on the novel
is it the one from the Ayn Rand Foundation in which you must demonstrate "an outstanding grasp of the philosophic and psychological meaning of The Fountainhead"?
To accomplish this all you have to do is invert all your altruistic instincts. For extra credit you might exult the virtues of being able to enter a room like a bad mother fucker.
I am reading Dracula, and enjoying it very much so far. I was reading it on my phone on the subway, getting to the spooky part when you first meet the count, and then I looked up and saw a poster for the vampire diaries. Dracula's mustache could beat all those prissy vamps into the dirt.
I just finished John Dies At The End. It was weird. But in a very, very good way.
I love John Dies at the End. Did you read it on the website?
I read the physical book, actually. Got it at a Borders that was going out of business for super cheap. I'll have to look at the website later, but I'm so glad there's more (and that a movie adaptation and a sequel are on the way).
John Dies At The End
Did John die at the end?
Spoilers: He actually died like 100 pages in, but then he got better.
Those are ebook pages, which are way smaller than normal book pages. It works out at about 700-800 paper pages.
No, its all four books. The first one alone is like 800 pages in paperback. Ebooks dont paginate at one page per screen; depending on your font size it could be two or three screens per page.
Or at least the nook does. I haven't used a kindle.
Just finished The Warrior-Prophet and I'm trying to find an ebook version of Thousandfold Thought that'll work on my Kobo (all the ones I've found have ? for any non-standard letter, which in Prince of Nothing is like every third letter).
Just finished The Warrior-Prophet and I'm trying to find an ebook version of Thousandfold Thought that'll work on my Kobo (all the ones I've found have ? for any non-standard letter, which in Prince of Nothing is like every third letter).
Those are ebook pages, which are way smaller than normal book pages. It works out at about 700-800 paper pages.
No, its all four books. The first one alone is like 800 pages in paperback. Ebooks dont paginate at one page per screen; depending on your font size it could be two or three screens per page.
Or at least the nook does. I haven't used a kindle.
I just finished rereading Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. And I dont care what people think. I cried. And I will probably cry every time I read it. I read every book as they came out. I grew up with Harry. Granted I was 16 when the first book came out, but still. Now I am watching the movie.
I just finished rereading Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. And I dont care what people think. I cried. And I will probably cry every time I read it. I read every book as the came out. I grew up with Harry. Granted I was 16 when the first book came out, but still. Now I am watching the movie.
I like it a lot as well. I don't understand the "bad writing" complaints of the series and of that book in general.
I don't understand the "bad writing" complaints of the series and of that book in general.
The "bad writing" complaints are about the fact that the books are badly written. They're not bad stories, per se -- but the prose is pretty awful. However, most people who aren't big readers (and I'm sure some people who are) tend not to care about that, and I think that's fine.
I don't understand the "bad writing" complaints of the series and of that book in general.
The "bad writing" complaints are about the fact that the books are badly written. They're not bad stories, per se -- but the prose is pretty awful. However, most people who aren't big readers (and I'm sure some people who are) tend not to care about that, and I think that's fine.
I've yet to see an actual example of clunky dialogue or really bad description. I don't think they're Ernest Hemingway or anything but they get the job done. You know which book has really clunky dialogue? Dune. Seriously. Harry Potter sounds like real people talking, Dune sounds like a group of robots that's found a grammar book and a dictionary from the 18th century.
Harry Potter sounds like real people talking, Dune sounds like a group of robots that's found a grammar book and a dictionary from the 18th century.
Except Dune is a book set in the far-future Dark Ages, where machines have been forsaken and everything is run according to impossibly complex feudal law strictures. It's supposed to sound that way. Rowling is a bad writer. One example: Rowling uses adverbial dialog modifiers ("said angrily," "said malevolently," "said sadly," etc.) constantly, which is a Greater Sin of creative writing. She is an excellent storyteller, but her writing is lacking. I'm saying this as an avowed fan of the series, who has been reading and rereading the books since he was in first grade.
One example: Rowling uses adverbial dialog modifiers ("said angrily," "said malevolently," "said sadly," etc.) constantly, which is a Greater Sin of creative writing.
Okay argument over. Learning time begins...now. Why is using these adverbial dialog modifiers a bad thing?
One example: Rowling uses adverbial dialog modifiers ("said angrily," "said malevolently," "said sadly," etc.) constantly, which is a Greater Sin of creative writing.
Okay argument over. Learning time begins...now. Why is using these adverbial dialog modifiers a bad thing?
This is also the favourite criticism of those who want to pick out bad writing. Personally I don't think breaking this one cliched rule makes one a bad writer, it just means you have a naive writing style compared to those more learned.
What's really bad is when someone learns this rule, and then modifies the words without understanding.
"Not now," she said angrily. vs "Not now," she said with an angry look on her face.
"Let's do it," they said excitedly. vs "Let's do it," they said with excitement in their voices.
"Yes," he said, nodding. vs "Yes," he said, tipping his head up and down.
In these cases, the second examples are bad writing, not the first.
The idea is that the emotion should be conveyed by the content of dialogue and not the modifier.
The emotion could be conveyed by a description of the character's actions, or facial expression, or a more vivid description of the tone. Using adverbs is just kinda lazy writing. It's not necessarily awful, but you're missing a lot of potential for more vivid imagery.
Comments
To accomplish this all you have to do is invert all your altruistic instincts. For extra credit you might exult the virtues of being able to enter a room like a bad mother fucker.
I just finished re-reading the first three John Carter of Mars books on a nostalgia trip.
Or at least the nook does. I haven't used a kindle.
What's really bad is when someone learns this rule, and then modifies the words without understanding.
"Not now," she said angrily.
vs
"Not now," she said with an angry look on her face.
"Let's do it," they said excitedly.
vs
"Let's do it," they said with excitement in their voices.
"Yes," he said, nodding.
vs
"Yes," he said, tipping his head up and down.
In these cases, the second examples are bad writing, not the first.