Re: One More Chapter for Your Perusal

Robert Lieblich wrote:
the Omrud wrote:
elanders wrote:
Sara Lorimer wrote:
elanders <elanders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Rowling uses thousands of Tom Swifties in Harry Potter.
Does she? I can't remember any, and they tend to stick out. Could you
point some out to me, please?
Exactly.

A well-done Tom Swiftie is hardly noticed.
Hardly worth bothering then.

I dunno, David. Maybe the idea is to bury them where the rabble read
right past them but the cognoscenti detect them and gasp in
admiration. Of course, that's damned tough to do. Of course, there's
always Gertrude Stern (sic).

I note also that elanders is flexible in his definition of "Tom
Swiftie." None of his examples in this thread is a "Tom Swiftie" by
strict definition.



You should talk about flexibility, Bob. You made about 25 edits on my except none of which you're apparently interested in defending. I've set up a thread for you to do that, but you've yet to respond.

Your problem is you don't know the difference between an error and a stylistic preference.

For example, I wrote:

"Accompanying the six coaches were a detachment of King's dragoons"

Your edit was:

"Were they in the coaches or alongside? If the latter -- and that's what the preceding paragraph suggests -- they were accompanying those in the coaches, not the coaches."

Well, that's ridiculous, Bob. It takes our colloquial use of language and tortures it into something it was never meant to be -- a pool of words to be inserted into crossword puzzles.

We don't write "accompanying the people in the motorcade" we write

"Accompanying the motorcade was a detachment of motorcycle police."
http://tinyurl.com/6tu2do

In other words, Bob, you think editing fiction is the same thing as doing a crossword puzzle when it most assuredly is not.

---------------------------------------------------->

Here's another example of your wrongheadedness:

I wrote --


"12 slim-waisted men bristling with sword, pistol, and
campaign gear ..."

Your edit:

"Bristle" implies some sort of aggressiveness. I'd say "wearing," which is neutral. Surely they weren't arriving to attack the palace.

----------------------------------------------------->

Wrong, Bob.

Their purpose has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that they were armed to the teeth. Again, your edit is just wrongheaded.

Also, for reasons unclear, you told me to get rid of "12" and write it out.

Again -- wrong, Bob.


And in every edit following these you do the same thing -- replace what I've written for no other reason than you were able to find an alternative you preferred.

Well, that's not editing; that's a guy trying to write my book for me.

Finally, here's something else that's not editing: cheap shots.

I wrote:


"Poor, Franz was looking ..."


Obviously, the comma after poor is a typo.

Not in your book, Crossword Puzzle Bob. In your book it's the "dumbest comma of the year!"

--------------------------------------------->
Bob's edit:


Poor, [It's early in 2009, but this is a strong
contender for dumbest comma of the year]
---------------------------------------------->

Ironically enough, right after making this claim, you gave us a sentence with three of your own typos.


But wait ... Crossword Bob was just getting warmed up ...

Once he figured he had everybody's attention, he gave us this gem:


------------------------------------------------->
I recommend you stop all attempts at creative writing for at least six
months and spend your time reading the finest English prose you can
get your hands on. If that doesn't do it, I recommend stopping again,
this time for good.

There's nothing wrong with a lack of talent. I lack talent in so many
fields -- creative writing included -- that I doubt the remainder of
my life would suffice to enable me to list them all. From what I've
read of your writing, you have no talent for it. Consider trying
something else.
------------------------------------------------->


Can you imagine that?

He gets every edit absolutely wrong, has never penned as much as a love letter in his life, and yet has the nerve to give the kind of pompous speech Ezra Pound would have had too much humility to give to the worst hack writer of all time.

Honestly, Bob, since you've never studied plot, characterization, dialogue, action, narrative, etc ... since you know zero about these things, what are you doing pontificating on fiction?

You have no expertise in the field. You've admitted this yourself -- so why are you holding yourself forth as a guru?

And how long have you been pulling this crap around here?

How long have you been telling young writers their writing sucks and should try something else?

How long, Crossword Bob?


EG



.

Relevant Pages

  • My Problem with Crossword Bob
    ... Bob. ... "Accompanying the six coaches were a detachment of King's dragoons" ... Your edit was: ... In other words, Bob, you think editing fiction is the same thing as doing a crossword puzzle when it most assuredly is not. ...
    (alt.usage.english)
  • Re: My Problem with Crossword Bob
    ... Bob did that, and he pointed ... The writer can defend it, ... "Accompanying the six coaches were a detachment of King's dragoons" ... Your edit was: ...
    (alt.usage.english)
  • Re: One More Chapter for Your Perusal
    ... came to a genuine edit is the Tom Swiftie, but even there, you showed ... Yours was no Tom Swiftie. ... And here's another one of your gems, Bob: ... > window as if the French Army was outside. ...
    (alt.usage.english)
  • Re: Get Your Fat Ass Over Here, Sponge Bob
    ... Your problem, Bob, is you don't know the difference between an error and a stylistic preference. ... "Accompanying the six coaches were a detachment of King's dragoons" ... Your edit was: ... If the latter -- and that's what the preceding paragraph suggests -- they were accompanying those in the coaches, ...
    (alt.usage.english)
  • Re: initialise declaration
    ... Thanks to Bob and Tom, ... Private Sub Worksheet_Activate ... Bob Phillips wrote: ... Tom made a mistake. ...
    (microsoft.public.excel.programming)
Loading