Three things...before dinner
May. 29th, 2012 06:06 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkat1.On posting or rather reposting: While I don't mind people referencing and linking to my posts (actually adore that - means that my blog reaches more readers and I meet new people), I'm not quite sure how I feel about someone taking an entire post and re-posting it to their journal, with merely a comment - "originally posted by shadowkat67". And not asking permission. Very weird. Feels like they are somehow taking possession of something I wrote and making it theirs.
Never seen anyone do this without asking me first. Isn't there etiquette for this sort of thing? It feels like copyright infringement on some level. Granted I've linked to posts, reposted paragraphs, and referenced without permission...but I'm pretty sure I've never reposted something that someone else online wrote in its entirety. Doing that - sort of kills my ability to edit, change it, or delete it - doesn't it? Also makes me realize that maybe deleting posts isn't is effective as I thought. Not that I plan on deleting the post I wrote - definitely not deleting it, but still.
http://joans-journal.livejournal.com/45716.html?view=103572#t103572
Am I being unreasonable? Should I have written something at the end of the post requesting people ask permission before reposting?? Maybe I am? Not wishing to appear passive aggressive about this - I decided to tell the person (have no idea who they are - they aren't on my flist) that while I don't mind referencing through a link - or linking to the essay, I do have issues with reposting something I wrote in its entirety without my permission.
2. On writing: As the writers improve on these romance novels...you begin to notice certain things. Such as...the fact that more experienced and secure writer doesn't feel the need to describe what the characters are wearing, what they look like, the color of their hair and eyes...every six pages. They actually trust the reader to remember!
Everyone who read 50 Shades complained about the over-use of holy, that didn't bother me so much. No what bugged me was the overuse of the description "pencil skirt" - which apparently is a popular new style amongst the rich and classy in the romance novel universe. I have no idea what a pencil skirt looks like. At first I thought...oh, it is pencil color, but no, they come in grays, blues, and whites...also brown. So maybe pencil thin? Wouldn't that be hard to walk in? Also this odd tendency to describe the clothing that everyone is wearing.
Example: "I am wearing a pencil skirt and a gray silk shirt. Christian is wearing dark pin striped suite, with matching vest and that gray tie I love." (He wears that tie a lot, he doesn't appear to have a variety of suits.) She doesn't stop there, the author also describes the clothing of Christian's family. I'm starting to feel like I've fallen into an episode of Project Runway.
It's very odd. Better contemporary writers feel the need to wax poetic about their environment or surroundings, often with detailed description, while romance novelists feel a need to...I'd say wax poetic but that's only historical romance novelists - let's face it not all that easy to wax poetic about a pin-striped suit, a gray tie, and a pencil skirt. Now a corset, waistcoat, and top hat...that you can do something with. This is the bane of the contemporary romance novelist and chick=lit novelists existence - it just is impossible to write poetic prose about a pair of jeans or a silk sheaf of an evening gown.
Not to pick on EL James, she's not alone in this absurd need to describe what people look like and are wearing every three or four pages. Silivia Day, who should know better, also does it. It seems to be a thing with erotica writers. That and finding new words for penis, abs, muscles, biceps, vagina, clit, balls, anus, breasts, nipples, lips, and various other parts of the human anatomy. You would not believe the euphemisms they've come up with...well maybe you would. A lot of people made fun of James - who used "down their" and his "thick length" and "fuck". Personally, I found James' refreshing. The ones who feel the need to wax poetic about it - are unintentionally hilarious. Although that's actually better than using the actual anatomical terms - which a lot of male writers like to do...and is about as erotic as reading stereo instructions. (ie: He stuck his penis in her vagina. Okay, why don't you use shorthand and say he fucked her and move on? Both are about equally titilating. For the record - Story of O is sort of written in that manner.) I personally prefer erotica with dialogue, its the most entertaining. Erotica without dialogue is well like reading a fight scene without dialogue...boring.
Yet, as the writing improves on the descriptions, it falls apart at times on the dialogue. Almost as if they can't do both at the same time? I will state that the book I'm reading now, Rainshadow Road is pretty good at dialogue.
Also why this need to keep describing the character's hair and eye color (George RR Martin ran into a problem on that one, when he forgot the eye-color of one of his characters and inadvertently changed it. Can't say I blame him for forgetting, he only has about a million characters to keep track of. What blows my mind is his fans picked up on it.
Okay, maybe not...this is the sort of thing I'd pick up on too, although not with Martin.)
So there are pitfalls to doing this folks - you could forget the hair-color and eye color of your characters...then oops. Buffy goes from being blond to brunette or Spike suddenly has brown eyes. It can happen.
James and Day, unlike Keylpas's Rainshadow Road, feel this weird need to keep describing their heroes chest and well endowed...package, along with how beautiful he is. By about the sixth or eight chapter, I was about ready to scream, we get it - he's goregeous and she can't believe he wants her - stop telling me already!
You can learn a lot about how not to write from crappy pulp fiction. Not that I didn't already know these things...
3. On subjective taste overruling objective taste in my brain: I've realized something...I will watch or read something poorly written over something brilliantly written if it has a character, plot-line, detail of some sort that hits either my kinks really really hard or fascinates me on some deep level or is a story I've been craving. Now, even I have my standards...there are some things I can't read/watch - they are either so poorly written or too offensive to my oh-so-delicate sensibilities (I'd give you examples...but no, then I'd have to think about them), I have a rule - the sentences have to make sense. I have to be able to tell the characters apart. And you can't summarize the entire plot. Also don't bore me or put me to sleep - which granted can happen with brilliantly written stories...Proust is guaranteed to put me to sleep.
OTOH...if it is brilliantly written, brilliantly shot - but I cannot stand the story, the characters, or the plot...I won't read or watch it. If there's something in it that just makes it impossible for me to watch or read it - that's it, end of story.
So...in some cases I may love to pieces something I know objectively is not brilliant, and sort of on the poorly written side of the fence, and despise something that I know objectively is brilliantly written. Subjective taste often takes precedence over objective taste or my gut rules my head when it comes to pleasure reading and pleasure viewing...which in some respects is how it should be.
PS: This should go without saying but...please don't repost anything listed above. You may reference it, of course. Or link. Just no reposting.
Never seen anyone do this without asking me first. Isn't there etiquette for this sort of thing? It feels like copyright infringement on some level. Granted I've linked to posts, reposted paragraphs, and referenced without permission...but I'm pretty sure I've never reposted something that someone else online wrote in its entirety. Doing that - sort of kills my ability to edit, change it, or delete it - doesn't it? Also makes me realize that maybe deleting posts isn't is effective as I thought. Not that I plan on deleting the post I wrote - definitely not deleting it, but still.
http://joans-journal.livejournal.com/45716.html?view=103572#t103572
Am I being unreasonable? Should I have written something at the end of the post requesting people ask permission before reposting?? Maybe I am? Not wishing to appear passive aggressive about this - I decided to tell the person (have no idea who they are - they aren't on my flist) that while I don't mind referencing through a link - or linking to the essay, I do have issues with reposting something I wrote in its entirety without my permission.
2. On writing: As the writers improve on these romance novels...you begin to notice certain things. Such as...the fact that more experienced and secure writer doesn't feel the need to describe what the characters are wearing, what they look like, the color of their hair and eyes...every six pages. They actually trust the reader to remember!
Everyone who read 50 Shades complained about the over-use of holy, that didn't bother me so much. No what bugged me was the overuse of the description "pencil skirt" - which apparently is a popular new style amongst the rich and classy in the romance novel universe. I have no idea what a pencil skirt looks like. At first I thought...oh, it is pencil color, but no, they come in grays, blues, and whites...also brown. So maybe pencil thin? Wouldn't that be hard to walk in? Also this odd tendency to describe the clothing that everyone is wearing.
Example: "I am wearing a pencil skirt and a gray silk shirt. Christian is wearing dark pin striped suite, with matching vest and that gray tie I love." (He wears that tie a lot, he doesn't appear to have a variety of suits.) She doesn't stop there, the author also describes the clothing of Christian's family. I'm starting to feel like I've fallen into an episode of Project Runway.
It's very odd. Better contemporary writers feel the need to wax poetic about their environment or surroundings, often with detailed description, while romance novelists feel a need to...I'd say wax poetic but that's only historical romance novelists - let's face it not all that easy to wax poetic about a pin-striped suit, a gray tie, and a pencil skirt. Now a corset, waistcoat, and top hat...that you can do something with. This is the bane of the contemporary romance novelist and chick=lit novelists existence - it just is impossible to write poetic prose about a pair of jeans or a silk sheaf of an evening gown.
Not to pick on EL James, she's not alone in this absurd need to describe what people look like and are wearing every three or four pages. Silivia Day, who should know better, also does it. It seems to be a thing with erotica writers. That and finding new words for penis, abs, muscles, biceps, vagina, clit, balls, anus, breasts, nipples, lips, and various other parts of the human anatomy. You would not believe the euphemisms they've come up with...well maybe you would. A lot of people made fun of James - who used "down their" and his "thick length" and "fuck". Personally, I found James' refreshing. The ones who feel the need to wax poetic about it - are unintentionally hilarious. Although that's actually better than using the actual anatomical terms - which a lot of male writers like to do...and is about as erotic as reading stereo instructions. (ie: He stuck his penis in her vagina. Okay, why don't you use shorthand and say he fucked her and move on? Both are about equally titilating. For the record - Story of O is sort of written in that manner.) I personally prefer erotica with dialogue, its the most entertaining. Erotica without dialogue is well like reading a fight scene without dialogue...boring.
Yet, as the writing improves on the descriptions, it falls apart at times on the dialogue. Almost as if they can't do both at the same time? I will state that the book I'm reading now, Rainshadow Road is pretty good at dialogue.
Also why this need to keep describing the character's hair and eye color (George RR Martin ran into a problem on that one, when he forgot the eye-color of one of his characters and inadvertently changed it. Can't say I blame him for forgetting, he only has about a million characters to keep track of. What blows my mind is his fans picked up on it.
Okay, maybe not...this is the sort of thing I'd pick up on too, although not with Martin.)
So there are pitfalls to doing this folks - you could forget the hair-color and eye color of your characters...then oops. Buffy goes from being blond to brunette or Spike suddenly has brown eyes. It can happen.
James and Day, unlike Keylpas's Rainshadow Road, feel this weird need to keep describing their heroes chest and well endowed...package, along with how beautiful he is. By about the sixth or eight chapter, I was about ready to scream, we get it - he's goregeous and she can't believe he wants her - stop telling me already!
You can learn a lot about how not to write from crappy pulp fiction. Not that I didn't already know these things...
3. On subjective taste overruling objective taste in my brain: I've realized something...I will watch or read something poorly written over something brilliantly written if it has a character, plot-line, detail of some sort that hits either my kinks really really hard or fascinates me on some deep level or is a story I've been craving. Now, even I have my standards...there are some things I can't read/watch - they are either so poorly written or too offensive to my oh-so-delicate sensibilities (I'd give you examples...but no, then I'd have to think about them), I have a rule - the sentences have to make sense. I have to be able to tell the characters apart. And you can't summarize the entire plot. Also don't bore me or put me to sleep - which granted can happen with brilliantly written stories...Proust is guaranteed to put me to sleep.
OTOH...if it is brilliantly written, brilliantly shot - but I cannot stand the story, the characters, or the plot...I won't read or watch it. If there's something in it that just makes it impossible for me to watch or read it - that's it, end of story.
So...in some cases I may love to pieces something I know objectively is not brilliant, and sort of on the poorly written side of the fence, and despise something that I know objectively is brilliantly written. Subjective taste often takes precedence over objective taste or my gut rules my head when it comes to pleasure reading and pleasure viewing...which in some respects is how it should be.
PS: This should go without saying but...please don't repost anything listed above. You may reference it, of course. Or link. Just no reposting.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2012-05-30 12:00 am (UTC)2. a pencil skirt is just what we used to call a straight skirt, or even a tight skirt, when I was in school (ie not an A-line or a Full skirt, but one that is straight up and down). And I agree completely that describing everything people wears is really stupid.... Although I put up with it in some Regency Romances (although I notice that Jane Austen did it only rarely, and only then to point out something that marked the outfit as a commentary on the character).
I like descriptions of settings and environments, particularly if the environment becomes like another character in the book... or creates and ambiance where I feel like I can really see and smell the atmosphere. But clothes do not do that at all!
3. yeah, I'll put up with a lot if there is a good trade off.... particularly in TV shows (I've watched quite a few dull TV shows because there is an actor I adore in it... but I do prefer to DVR/tape it so I can fast forward through the dullest parts).
Heck, I just finished a book yesterday with nothing to recommend it (actually in the middle of the book I actually enjoyed it a bit, but then it got worse and worse toward the end until I was forced to just skim the book to find out how it ended). The only reason I wanted to finish reading it was because they were going to discuss it at Felicia Day's Vaginal Fantasy book club, where I discovered that EVERYONE hated the book! LOL
no subject
Date: 2012-05-30 12:13 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-05-30 12:17 am (UTC)They are going to get sued if they keep doing that. Big time copyright infringement.
no subject
Date: 2012-05-30 12:43 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-05-30 01:04 am (UTC)Why do people like Tumblr again? Sounds like its for non-writers like Facebook. Really good for art and gifs, really bad for written work.
no subject
Date: 2012-05-30 01:49 am (UTC)I don't think it's even like Facebook; Facebook is great for keeping in touch with friends and acquaintances. It's all about posting little updates of what you're doing; mostly like Twitter but with the option to share pictures and such. Tumblr... is really more like Pinterest, which as far as I can tell is like a giant digital bulletin board full of pictures of stuff you like. You 'pin' anything that catches your attention and sort them into groups, but it's very photo-based. Tumblr is rather like that, but people use it for fandom.
It's great for sharing images, but making sure it's all sourced back to you... maybe not so much. It's definitely not for writers or discussion, not really. Like I said, I created an account mostly so I'd have a friends-list of blogs I could follow, and I'm really only doing that because the fandom for a show I like has moved over to Tumblr and there's a lot of good fanart.
no subject
Date: 2012-05-30 01:56 am (UTC)Otherwise...not so much?
no subject
Date: 2012-05-30 02:03 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-05-30 04:25 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-05-30 12:49 am (UTC)2- Pencil skirts are just those tight skirts, like... business suit skirts. Seems to be a new term for an old thing. As for the constant descriptions... I see this a lot in fanfic. I'm sure part of it is insecure writers, but I also wonder if maybe the author purposely wants to make it as visual as possible? Like, they can't draw out a picture so they want to over-describe all the details so the reader is sure to picture it "right" when they read. Maybe they think that makes the sex more interesting? *shrug* Honestly I don't generally read romance or erotica, unless it's to laugh at the overly-flowery language of the sex scenes. And terrible terrible euphemisms.
3- I'm completely with you on this one. When I want a specific type of story, I will read anything I can find in that vein, even if it's below my usual standards. Though this rule mostly applies to fanfiction rather than books for me. I have a much harder time tolerating bad books than bad fic.
no subject
Date: 2012-05-30 02:01 am (UTC)http://www.victoriassecret.com/clothing/sale-and-clearance/pencil-skirt?ProductID=3734&cm_mmc=CA-_-Nextag-_-CAREER%20SKIRTS-_-WE-259691
no subject
Date: 2012-05-30 09:39 pm (UTC)Apparently they called them that back in the 1950s and 60s, and now they are making a comeback? I don't know, I wore the damn things in the 80s and 90s.
no subject
Date: 2012-05-30 10:23 am (UTC)I see other people have explained what a pencil skirt is. Given the subject matter of the book, the fact that, yes, it does restrict movement a bit is probably not a coincidence.
no subject
Date: 2012-05-30 09:37 pm (UTC)In the book? It's not that clear. She's wearing it to work, they don't have sex with her in it and she chooses the skirt. I doubt it was intentional...be giving the writers a bit too much credit. ;-)