It has to be a “summer read” if the word “summer” is in the title.
Summer is either a great time to read books or a lousy time to read books. If you get any vacation time, you can take the time to catch up on reading. On the other hand, if you have vacation time, there might be so much going on that you’re too busy to read books. Either way, there will be a bunch of new best sellers coming out over the summer, and here is the list so far in mid-June 2016 (according to the New York Times):
1. The Emporer’s Revenge-Clive Cussler and Boyd Morrison
Clive Cussler is still writing books? I remember reading Raise the Titanic almost 40 years ago. Times have changed. Back in the 1980s, Cussler’s protagonist was Dirk Pitt. Dirk Pitt was a manly name. Now his protagonist is Juan Cabrillo. I guess Juan Cabrillo is a masculine guy, but no name is more masculine than Dirk Pitt… except maybe Clive Cussler.
Clive Cussler is a manly name. The hard c’s make it alliterative and masculine, Clive just sounds manly, and Cussler has the word cuss in it. It’s tough to get more manly than that combination.
It’s too bad Dirk Pitt isn’t in the new Clive Cussler novel. Otherwise, I’d have to decide whose name is more manly.
2. Before the Fall-Noah Hawley
Noah Hawley is/was a writer for the television series Fargo (not the movie), so if you like the television series, you might enjoy this book. I watched one episode of Fargo and stopped. Plus, this book is about a plane crash. I grew up in the 1970s when there were lots of movies about planes crashing (or almost crashing). Plus, I got suckered by the first season of Lost, which started off with a plane crash.
But if you like the TV show Fargo and you like Lost….
3. All Summer Long– Dorothea Benton Frank
This has all the appearances of a summer read. It has the word summer in the title. The cover has a woman in a summer outfit on a yacht in open water. The blurb is vague, but it talks about zany eccentric rich people and life-altering decisions. I was expecting a hot young guy for the married female protagonist, but no hot young guy was mentioned in the blurb. I also thought maybe a zany eccentric rich character would get murdered, but that wasn’t mentioned either.
If there’s no murder and there’s no hot young guy, how can this be a summer read?
4. The Girl on the Train– Paula Hawkins
Every time I review a best seller’s list, I have to think of something new for The Girl on the Train. It’s difficult to come up with something original to say about this book. I just can’t believe there are still enough people who haven’t read this book to keep it on a best seller’s list.
5. After You– Jojo Moyes
This is the sequel to another Moyes best seller Me Before You. Since I haven’t read Me Before You, I’d probably better not read After You. If you’ve read Me Before You and wondered what happened to the main female character afterward, then you should read After You, but you might get mad at what you discover.
6. 15th Affair– James Patterson and Maxine Paetro
James Patterson. Pffffft.
Is it disrespectful to review a James Patterson book with a “Pfffft” before even reading what it’s about?
7. A Hero of France– Alan Furst
I wish my last name was Furst. It’s not a braggadocious name because its spelled F-U-R-S-T instead of F-I-R-S-T. If it’s spelled F-I-R-S-T, then a guy can look kind of arrogant. But if it’s F-U-R-S-T, then you can still be pronounced First without proclaiming that you’re first. I wonder how many times somebody has said: “This is the first Furst novel I’ve ever read.”
At any rate, here’s another best selling book set in during World War II. No best seller’s list is complete without at least one book set during World War II.
8. The Weekenders– Mary Kay Andrews
It’s a mystery on a resort island. The main character is an outsider and must learn about a bunch of local secrets. The blurb was kind of vague about what the mystery was about. Usually the blurbs tell me more about the story than I want to know. I think it’s one of those light-hearted murder mysteries where the main character is never in any real danger. At least, that’s the impression I get.
9. The Last Mile– David Baladacci
I almost forgot that I’d included The Last Mile in May’s best seller list, which is ironic because the main character Amos Decker never forgets anything. When your main character remembers everything, your editors better scour every page of every Amos Decker book to make sure there are no inconsistencies. I know that authors have to come up with something unique for their protagonists, but a hero with a perfect memory is risky. It’s probably easier to have your protagonist just be a good fighter, or be a good shot, or be immune from catching sexually transmitted diseases.
10. The Nest– Cynthia D’Aprix Sweeney
The Nest has a controversially long first sentence, and I’m not sure how to pronounce the author’s middle name. The middle name does make the author seem more serious. Cynthia Sweeney seems like a simple name (because of the alliteration), but you throw in the “D’Aprix” (which I don’t know how to pronounce), and now her name looks more literary. A Cynthia Sweeney doesn’t sound like a literary author.
*****
What do you think? Which of these best sellers would you most likely read? What unique characteristic would you like your fictional main character to have? What name is more manly than Clive Cussler? And how do you pronounce D’Aprix?
They would have tolerated his cheating at cards if he hadn’t farted so much. (image via Wikimedia)
There are a lot of valid reasons to get into a fight. If somebody looks at you funny. If somebody talks about your mom. If somebody is disrespectful to your spouse. If somebody gives you a crappy nickname. But what if you get accused of farting in public?
It’s happened. A few nights ago in a Florida restaurant, a brawl broke out over public flatulence. It was reported on the news, so it has to be true. Plus, if this lone incident made news, think about how many times this has happened and has gone unreported.
I’m not the kind of guy who likes to watch fights on the internet. Even so, I’d like to see a video of what escalated an argument about farts into a fistfight. It validates one of my most strongly held life-long beliefs. I’ve proclaimed all (or most of my adult) life that few accusations are worse than being accused of farting in public. It’s almost as bad as being called a racist. In fact, the last time I was called a racist (it doesn’t happen much), I accused my accuser of farting in public. He was stunned by the comeback, and I left before he could take a swing at me.
Since I got the last word, I won the argument.
Everybody knows, it’s rude to fart in public, but nobody likes being accused of farting either. Usually people try to pretend the fart didn’t happen. If the fart was loud, bystanders look down or make brief eye contact and try not to laugh. If the flatulence is smelly, bystanders might hold their breath while trying not to look like they’re holding their breath. Sometimes people have to make a decision between breathing through their noses or their mouths. But rarely do farters get called out for their gas passing. Accusing somebody of farting is almost as rude as farting.
I know fights over farts happen. I got beat up once after school because I farted in class and passed the blame onto some other guy. This other guy was quiet, so I figured he wouldn’t do anything about it. I guess being accused of farting was his breaking point because after school he charged me, knocked me off my bike, and beat a confession out of me. In my defense, I couldn’t build any righteous anger to fight this guy hard because I knew I was wrong, so I went ahead and admitted it. Luckily, my family moved a few states away the next year, and my reputation as a farter didn’t follow. At the time, my pacifist friends told me that it was a dumb reason to fight. But it taught me a lesson; don’t accuse others of farting unless you’re ready to go all-out.
Some say that elevators are the worst bad place to pass gas because it’s such a confined space. It would also be a bad place to get into a fight over who farted. I have nightmares about elevators dropping, so I’d go insane if a fight over a fart ever broke out in an elevator. Between the flatulence, the confined space, fists flying all over the place, and the elevator dropping, I’d probably panic.
The worst place to fart, even worse than an elevator, is anywhere where food is being served. Farting in a restaurant is the worst, and farters in that situation should be dealt with. I don’t condone violence, but sometimes farters don’t listen to reason. I’m proof of that. Getting farted on in a restaurant is like being seated right next to the bathroom. If I’m seated next to the bathroom, I politely tell the waiter that I won’t spend money on an establishment that puts me next to a bathroom. I’ll put up with a lot of errors from restaurant staff because I know it’s not an easy job, and I usually tip too much, but I refuse to be seated next to a bathroom. I’m not sure I’d get into a fight over it though. But if I won’t sit next to a rest room when I’m eating, then I can understand why people don’t like farting in a restaurant.
*****
Writing about farting and other body functions on my blog is a little risky because I try to avoid stuff that’s too low brow. Usually I like to talk about literature and the writing process and stuff like that, but then I saw this story about a fight over a fart in a restaurant. How could anybody resist that? If I hadn’t acknowledged that brawl in some way, I might have regretted it for the rest of my life.
*****
What do you think? Would you fight somebody who accused you of farting in public? What’s the dumbest reason you’ve ever gotten into a fight? What body function is too low brow to write about on a blog?
*****
When I was a kid, I was punished for saying the word crap. Looking back, it kind of ticks me off because now I know…
And here is the true story of my one moment of high school glory!
Now only 99 cents each on the Amazon Kindle!
She’s smiling now, but if you spoil the ending to Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, she’ll be pissed. (image via Wikimedia)
It’s a problem only a truly successful author can have. Famous author J.K. Rowling doesn’t want fans to spoil the ending of her new play Harry Potter and the Cursed Child.
Spoilers are probably inevitable though. A play isn’t like a movie; people can’t attend simultaneous performances. Only a fortunate few will see each performance, but those few will be excited and want to talk about it, and once they start yammering about it, secrets about what happens will be revealed and feelings will be hurt. Maybe even J.K. Rowling’s feelings.
Nobody wants to hurt J.K. Rowling’s feelings.
Even if J.K. Rowling fans take J.K. Rowling’s request to go spoiler-free seriously, there are a few jerks in every crowd, and somebody will spoil the end. After all, J.K. Rowling couldn’t even keep Robert Galbraith a secret for long, so you know somebody will spoil The Cursed Child.
There is a way to prevent spoilers in this situation, but only an author like J.K. Rowling could do it. Next time she writes a novel (or a play), she should have several different endings and not tell the public there are several different endings. Each book (with the different endings) would have the exact same cover. The whole point is that none none of her fans would have any idea that there were several different endings.
Then, when somebody spoils the ending, somebody else who has read the book (but probably a different version) will overhear the conversation and contradict the spoiler. A big argument will ensue over how the book really ended. If the gods are devious that day, several different readers who’ve read several different versions will end up arguing with each other at the same time.
How long would it take before the public realizes it has been pranked? Then J.K. Rowling could eventually declare that one ending is the definitively true ending, and fans could argue over which ending it is.
Rowling could use the spoilers’ eagerness to ruin other peoples’ enjoyment against them. It would be awesome if done correctly.
I’d do it myself, but I’m a struggling aspiring author. I’d be lucky if several people read my books and discussed them with each other. Only an author like J.K. Rowling (or Stephen King) could pull this off. Maybe George R.R. Martin could do it, but it would take him a couple decades to write all five endings.
Maybe this has already been done, and I don’t know about it. I can’t be the first person to have ever thought about this. I’d hate to have this grand idea and then have a bunch of people point out that it has already been done dozens of times. It would be humiliating. But even if it has been done, it probably hasn’t been done by somebody with a following like J.K. Rowling.
*****
What do you think? Would you be upset if you found out you had been pranked by an author who wrote several different endings? Has somebody already done this and I just don’t know about it? What authors other than J.K. Rowling could pull off a spoiler-prevention prank like this?
*****
When I was a kid, I got my mouth washed out with soap for saying the word crap.
Looking back, it ticks me off because now I know….
Now available on Amazon!
If I say no, she’ll badger me until I take her phone away from her. (image via wikimedia)
A YouTube star is coming to a local book store for a signing, and my daughters want to go. I have a tough time calling a YouTuber a star, but this guy has millions of subscribers, and his first book was a best seller, so I guess not calling him a star would be quibbling.
I’m not looking forward to the book signing. We’ll probably have to get to the book store early and stand in line just to get our slip with the number that tells us where to stand in the real line. Those lines will be filled with a bunch of people whom I don’t want to be around. I don’t even like standing in book-signing lines when I’m surrounded by fellow book readers. There’s no way I can handle a line filled with teenage YouTube fans.
I’m going to be a bad parent that day. My plan is to drop my kids off in the line and go far away. Thankfully, the line will be in a book store, so I won’t go too far. I’m not driving away and going home for a few hours. I’m not that kind of a bad parent.
The YouTuber is in his late 20’s and is obnoxious (by my standards). He eats food and makes stage faces. He does DIY videos and also conducts an occasional interview with other obnoxious people. He curses way too much.
The first time I watched one of this YouTuber’s videos, he used the word “f#cking” twice as an adjective in his first two sentences. I would have felt better if he had used the term “f#cking” only once in his first two sentences. I’m not sure what the “f#cking”-per-sentence ratio should be, but it shouldn’t be once-per-sentence. That’s just lazy. Maybe once every two sentences is approaching respectability, but I expect higher standards for somebody with millions of subscribers.
Then again, I’m not the YouTuber’s target audience. I’m probably not any YouTuber’s target audience. I’m the guy who pays for the YouTuber’s target audience. That should mean that the YouTuber needs my approval, but things don’t work like that anymore (if they ever did).
When I was kid, if I had talked the way this YouTuber talks in his video, I would have gotten my mouth washed out with soap or have gotten the belt. I’d kind of like to see a video of this guy getting his mouth washed out with soap. That would make a great YouTube video. Even though I’m not in his target audience, I’d watch that. And I’d pay to see it.
This YouTuber churns out a new video almost every day, and within hours has hundreds of thousands of hits. It’s a little deflating to me. I write one blog post a week, and a few people read it. Maybe I’ll get a few comments but nothing like this guy gets. Most of his commenters don’t seem to write very well, though. At least, if they do know how to write, they don’t show it. On the other hand, people who comment on my blog write very well and are probably smarter than me because half the time they’re correcting my own errors.
In case you can’t tell, I really don’t want to spend money on this YouTuber’s book. I feel like I’m just rewarding his bad behavior. Even worse, I’ll probably have to buy two copies, one for each daughter, so both of them can take individual pictures with him. This means I’ll be rewarding his bad behavior twice. I don’t even know if this new book is any good or not because it won’t come out until a couple days before the signing!
Despite my better judgement, I’m probably going to let my daughters go to the book signing. But they’re going to do a bunch of my own chores around the house to get there. And they’re going to have to wait until I get home from work to do these chores. And while they do my usual chores, I’m going to get extra time for reading and writing, and they’re going to leave me alone while they do my chores.
I’m going to get so much reading and writing done while they’re doing chores that I’ll get bored of reading and writing. Maybe, just maybe, my daughters will do so many chores that they will start to despise this YouTuber. And if they do enough chores, I might even start to like him.
*****
I think YouTube is great. I watch YouTube, but my viewing habits are different from my daughters’. They watch new content (which I don’t find appealing), and I watch old content, such as old comedy routines, scenes from old movies, football games from years ago, and the occasional Game of Thrones commentary. Most of the YouTube stars I’d want to meet are dead already.
*****
What do you think? Would you allow your kids to go to a YouTuber book signing? Would you even want to read a book written by a YouTuber? What is respectable “f#cking”-per-sentence ratio for a performer?
*****
When I was a kid, I got my mouth washed out with soap for saying the word “crap.” Looking back, that ticks me off because now I know that…
Now available on Amazon!
Title Tip #1- Take a compound word and reverse it.
Most writers struggle to make money, so it’s news when relatively unknown authors get huge advances for their debut novels. Writers such as Stephanie Danler and Cynthia D’Aprix Sweeney have received huge advances for their recently published debut novels, Sweetbitter and The Nest.
I’ll admit, the phrase “huge advance” is subjective. To me, if it’s enough money to live on for a while, then it’s a huge advance.
Giving out a huge advance for a debut novel is a risk for publishers. The publishing companies want to lock down a potential money-making writer, but if the public doesn’t respond, then the company is stuck with an overpaid author. A part of me thinks it’s impractical to give an unproven writer way too much money.
Then again, I don’t have a problem with some young writer making so much money up front. I’m jealous, but I don’t have a problem with it happening. If a publisher offered me 2 million dollars for my first piece of fiction, I wouldn’t say, “It’s way too much money, and I haven’t proven myself yet.”
An aspiring author like me has to be careful when writing about how much money another writer makes. It’s none of my business how much another writer makes. Another writer’s contract doesn’t affect me at all. If these young authors hadn’t been offered anything, it wouldn’t help me. Plus, griping about another writer’s financial success can come across as sour grapes. But as an aspiring author, I can’t ignore what makes other writers successful.
I began reading The Nest just to see what made publishers so eager to fork out money for it. Maybe I could learn something from this new author’s writing style. What did this new author have that I didn’t (besides talent)? I began with an open mind (When somebody else says that, I usually think “No, you didn’t), but I couldn’t get far.
Below is the first sentence (not first paragraph) of The Nest:
“As the rest of the guests wandered the deck of the beach club under an early-evening midsummer sky, taking pinched, appraising sips of their cocktails to gauge if the bartenders were using the top-shelf stuff and balancing tiny crab cakes on paper napkins while saying appropriate things about how they’d really lucked out with the weather because the humidity would be back tomorrow, or murmuring inappropriate things about the bride’s snug sating dress, wondering if the spilling cleavage was due to bad tailoring or poor taste (a look as their own daughters might say) or an unexpected weight gain, winking and making tired jokes about exchanging toasters for diapers, Leo Plumb left his cousin’s wedding with one of the waitresses.”
I have to give the author credit; I’ll always remember that sentence. But if I had tried to write a sentence like that in high school or college, my writing instructors would have criticized me. None of them would have appreciated that sentence.
Instead of such a long sentence, I would have been encouraged to write something more like:
“As the rest of the guests wandered the deck of the beach club under an early-evening midsummer sky, Leo Plumb left his cousin’s wedding with one of the waitresses.”
A sentence like that is easier to read, but nobody would remember it. It ticks me off when the stuff that I’ve been taught in school turns out to be wrong.
The other new novel from an unproven author was Sweetbitter by Stephanie Danler. This author also has received a huge advance for her book. I thought, maybe I could learn something from this novel as well. Again, I paused after the first sentence.
“You will develop a palate.”
I felt betrayed by my writing instructors! I was taught not to use the word “you” when writing. If I had begun any kind of writing with the sentence “You will develop a palate,” my instructor would have told me to rewrite the sentence. A better alternative (according to them) would have been:
“Everybody will develop a palate.”
Personally, I like “You will develop a palate” better than “Everybody will develop a palate,” but my writing instructors would have disagreed, and they were the ones with the power to grade my papers. But if Stephanie Danler had written “Everybody will develop a palate,” her manuscript might have been tossed aside.
In college, I wrote a short story in 2nd-person. I knew it was frowned upon, so I tried it, and then I got lectured in front of the class for trying it. All the students in the class nodded in agreement with the professor when he said that 2nd-person was inappropriate for fiction. Six months later, Bright Lights, Big City by Jay McInerney became a best seller. Unfortunately, I couldn’t use it to bolster my case because it was a new semester, so the class was over. I hate it when I’m right but I don’t get the proof until after the argument is over.
To be fair, my short story probably sucked, but not because it was written in 2nd-person.
When it comes to 2nd person and long sentences, I don’t know who is right, my former writing instructors or the publishing industry. These rule-breaking opening sentences had to be approved by literary agents, editors, and publishers, but not by writing instructors. Maybe my writing instructors were correct, and the publishing industry is simply rewarding bad behavior. That happens all over society today. The law abiding rule-followers get punished while those who break the rules get rewarded. Maybe that’s the case here.
I’m not sure what to believe anymore.
*****
What do you think? Would you continue reading a novel that starts like Sweetbitter or The Nest? Are publishers making a long-term mistake giving new authors huge contracts for their debut novels?
*****
The first sentence isn’t very long, but I used the word “you” a few times later on to make up for it.
Now available on Amazon!
This picture is so awesome, Donald Trump uses it on his Twitter page.
Social Media Rule #1: Don’t mess with J.K. Rowling! (image via Wikimedia)
In a feud between Donald Trump and J.K. Rowling, almost everybody would root for J.K. Rowling. That’s no insult to Donald Trump (though lots of people like insulting him). J.K. Rowling would get public sympathy in a feud with just about anybody. But last week, J.K. Rowling raised eyebrows a little bit during a speech when she defended Trump’s right to speak in England (if he ever chooses to).
As soon as Rowling mentioned Trump in her speech, she had to clarify what she was talking about with:
“Now, I find almost everything that Mr. Trump says objectionable. I consider him offensive and bigoted. But he has my full support to come to my country and be offensive and bigoted there. His freedom to speak protects my freedom to call him a bigot.”
When celebrities get involved with politics, it can be disastrous, but writers usually handle issues better than actors/singers/performers. Rowling worded her statement carefully so that the focus wasn’t as much about Trump as it was about freedom of speech. Even those who disagreed with her position on freedom of speech couldn’t get angry because she got her licks in on Donald Trump. Trump supporters won’t get angry because J.K. Rowling is British, and Trump supporters don’t care what people outside the United States think about U.S. politics.
Even so, there are some similarities between Donald Trump and J.K. Rowling. The similarities are not eerie, they’re not mind blowing. They might even be trivial. But still, they’re similarities.
- Both are known for using social media.
J.K. Rowling tweets a lot. Donald Trump tweets a lot. I don’t follow either of them on Twitter because whenever one of them writes an interesting tweet, the media reports it. Why would I follow somebody whose tweets get reported all over the place? I only follow people who don’t get reported.
Maybe Trump tweets too much. Maybe presidential candidates shouldn’t use Twitter at all. Maybe somebody else is writing Donald Trump’s tweets. I’m pretty sure J..K Rowling writes her own tweets. Her tweets make the news without having to be controversial. Therefore, when it comes to social media, J.K. Rowling wins.
- Both have secret identities.
Back in the 1990’s, Trump pretended to be a publicist named John Miller talking to reporters. Trump denies that he was the publicist, but nobody believes him. That’s what I like about Trump. He understands that when you have a secret identity, you never admit it.
On the other hand, a few years ago when Robert Galbraith was discovered to be J.K. Rowling, she didn’t try to cover it up. That’s unforgivable. Robert Galbraith’s own Twitter page even admits that he’s J.K. Rowling. Disgraceful. J.K. Rowling obviously doesn’t understand the importance of secrecy in secret identities.
When it comes to secret identities, Trump wins.
- Both have best-selling books.
J.K. Rowling has written one of the greatest fantasy series ever. Trump has written (or somebody wrote for him) a book about how to make money. If Trump becomes president, he’ll be able to write a memoir or two out of that. I’m pretty sure J.K. Rowling has some good books left in her, even if she goes by a different name.
With apologies to Trump (or whoever wrote his books for him), this one isn’t even close. J.K. Rowling wins this category.
Out of all the people who have attacked Donald Trump, J.K. Rowling is the only one whom Trump hasn’t counter-attacked. Maybe Trump is afraid of J.K. Rowling. If I were a politician, I wouldn’t want to take her on. Maybe the Democrats should ditch Hillary Clinton and nominate J.K. Rowling. Sure, she’s British, but Ted Cruz was Canadian and Republicans didn’t care. If nationality becomes an issue, President Obama could sign an executive order making it okay. Democrats could do worse than having J.K. Rowling as a presidential nominee (and probably will end up with somebody worse).
Whenever bloggers or websites needs to spike numbers, they write about Donald Trump or J.K. Rowling (or Game of Thrones or porn). It must be nice to be Trump or Rowling because they can spike their own blog numbers just by writing about themselves. Next week I think I’ll write an article about Donald Trump and J.K. Rowling starring in a porn version of Game of Thrones. It will be a blockbuster.
*****
J.K. Rowling seems very polite. Donald Trump seems like a guy who swears a lot.
Here’s the book dedicated to polite people who like to swear.
Now available on Amazon!
It depends on what is doing the sucking and what is getting sucked. (image via wikimedia)
“This sucks!” my youngest daughter muttered as she was washing the dishes.
I didn’t blame her. The dishes had piled up over the course of the day, and nobody had done them, and my daughter had smarted off to my wife at the wrong time, so now she was stuck with a sinkful of crusty dishes. Yes, we have a dishwasher, but my wife insists on all the dried remnants getting scraped before the dishes are placed into the washer. It’s probably more time consuming than it needs to be, but our dishes never need a rewash.
“Don’t say ‘sucks,’” my wife said. “It’s rude. And it’s vulgar.”
“It is?” my daughter asked.
“It is?” I asked.
I had never thought about it before, and I think about vulgar expressions all the time. I’ve been saying variations of “This sucks” for as long as I remember. I wanted to defend my daughter saying “This sucks,” but there were a lot of chores to do around the house, and all of them sucked, so it wasn’t the best time to get into a linguistics argument with my wife.
Hearing my wife complain about the word sucks brought back bad memories. When I was a kid, I got punished for saying “bad” words like sucks and crap. It ticked me off so much that I even wrote this book Crap Is NOT a Bad Word!: and Other Topics Polite People Don’t Discuss .
A part of me understands my wife’s concerns. Suck/sucks fits the construct of a bad word. Most bad words have four-letter root words. Suck is four letters. But not every four-letter word is a bad word. Suck rhymes with f*ck, and f*ck is a bad word, but not every word that rhymes with f*ck is bad. Muck is okay. Luck and duck are okay too. Therefore, suck might be okay. Like most things, it depends on the context.
One problem with sucks is that sucks is a transitive verb, meaning that there has to be a direct object after it. You don’t just suck. You have to suck something. Without that something (which is the direct object), the sentence is incomplete. For example, a vacuum cleaner doesn’t just suck; a vacuum cleaner sucks dirt/dust/hair/etc…
Just so you know, I don’t really know anything about transitive/intransitive verbs and direct objects. I had to look them up.
Anyway, when you insult somebody by saying “You suck,” the sentence should be “You suck ________.” Whether or not suck is a bad word or not depends on what the direct object is. It depends on what is being sucked.
If the sentence is, “You suck lollipops,” then sucks wouldn’t be bad because it’s okay to suck lollipops and there’s nothing insulting about it. To most people, sucking lollipops is perfectly fine. Saying “This sucks lollipops!” would be a compliment. But that’s never what people mean when they say “This sucks!”
“You suck exhaust fumes” is more problematic because sucking exhaust fumes leads to death and that would be very bad. In most cases, saying “You suck exhaust fumes” could be taken as an insult, but it’s not socially forbidden to talk about exhaust fumes, so it wouldn’t be considered bad or vulgar.
The socially forbidden direct object for “You suck _______!” would be the word d*ck. “You suck d*ck” is probably the worst of the interpretations of “You suck ______” because it is socially forbidden to talk about sucking d*ck. I personally am not judging the physical act of sucking d*ck, but it is considered vulgar to discuss, and I’m a polite person, so I usually don’t talk about sucking d*ck on my blog.
Most people would not blurt out “This sucks d*cks!” But saying “This sucks!” without the word d*ck is almost socially acceptable. People have forgotten what the direct object is. So if you believe that the direct object matters, then you might believe saying “You suck” is a vulgar expression.
Saying “This stinks” is safer because everybody knows what stinks. There is no implied direct object, so nobody can see stinks as a bad word or “This stinks” as a vulgar expression. Saying stinks is safer, but it isn’t as much fun. The sound –inks is nowhere as much fun to say as the sound –uck or –ucks. If I could get away with it, all I’d say are words that end with –uck.
If saying variations of “This sucks” is vulgar, I need an alternative for my daughters so that they don’t get in trouble. “This stinks!” is okay, but it doesn’t have enough emotional impact. Adding a family-friendly direct object to “This sucks!” might make the meaning less ambiguous, and therefore, less vulgar.
Some possibilities include:
“This sucks… the joy out of my life.”
“This sucks… away the free time I had.”
If you would rather not to use the word sucks at all, I prefer the phrase: “This is not an ideal situation.”
“This is not an ideal situation,” is more sophisticated than “This sucks” or “This stinks.” Plus, it has a bit of understatement. There isn’t enough understatement in this world. Some people don’t care for understatement, but I’ve never heard anybody say “Understatement sucks!”
FINAL VERDICT- Sucks is NOT a bad word, but if you run across anybody who disagrees, be prepared to add a family-friendly direct object.
*****
What do you think? Should suck/sucks be a bad word? What better alternatives are there for the word suck?
Would anybody read this if it were set during the Franco-Prussian War instead of World War II?
May is the month before summer begins, and summer means reading lists from just about every book blog and literary website. The following recent hardcover novels might end up on summer reading lists just because they came out before summer began. Others have been on the best sellers list for so long that they’ll be on summer reading lists just by default. And I think a couple of these books will drop like an anvil off the charts before summer even begins.
Below is the best seller list for for hardcover fiction in early May 2016:
-
Extreme Prey by John Sandford
This is the 26th Prey book, where all the novels have the word Prey in the title. With 26 books, the author could have published an alphabet series like Sue Grafton. At some point, Sandford is going to run out of clever Prey titles. I’m waiting for Lettuce Prey (with a vegetarian serial killer), but it hasn’t happened yet.
2. The Last Mile by David Baldacci
The protagonist detective in this novel has a perfect memory, but a perfect anything is a risk for an author. All it takes is one nit-picky reader with too much time on his/her hands to find a mistake, and the whole premise is shattered. I don’t have time (and I’m not nit-picky enough) to find the inconsistencies in the main character’s memory, but I bet if you read this book carefully, this guy’s memory isn’t perfect.
3. The Obsession by Nora Roberts
Nora Roberts has written over 200 books, and I haven’t read any of them. Maybe I’ve read a JD Robb novel. I think I have, so I guess I’ve read a Nora Roberts book. If somebody wanted to read all of Nora Roberts’s books, would they have to read all of JD Robb’s books too? I get obsessed with authors who write tons of books. I used to be obsessed with James Patterson because of all the books with his name on them. Maybe I should become obsessed with Nora Roberts too. Not obsessed enough to get arrested or anything, but just… obsessed.
4. The Girl on the Train by Paula Hawkins
This novel is almost like the Donald Trump of books; nobody I know likes it, but somebody is buying it. To be fair, I know people who like Donald Trump. I don’t know anybody who thinks The Girl on the Train is a great book, at least not great enough to be on the best sellers list for so long.
5. The Nest by Cynthia D’Aprix Sweeney
This book’s plot is described as a dysfunctional family squabbling over an inheritance. I think dysfunctional poor families are more interesting than dysfunctional rich families. I like the word “dysfunctional,” though. I don’t know why.
6. Eligible by Curtis Sittenfeld
Curtis Sittenfeld is a woman? At first, I thought Curtis Sittenfeld was a dude who had written this “modern retelling of Pride and Prejudice.” That might have been more interesting to me (I don’t mean that in a sexist way, but it probably comes across like that anyway). Now that I know Curtis is a woman, that’s all I can focus on. Evelyn Waugh was a guy too. Sometimes the literary world is crazy.
7. The Nightingale by Kristin Hannah
Here’s another novel that’s been on the best seller’s list for a long time. Like a bunch of other recent best sellers (such as All the Light We Cannot See), it’s set during World War II. Everybody understands World War II. It’s the go-to war for fiction. If The Nightingale had been set in France during the Franco-Prussian War of 1870, not as many people would want to read about that. I’m not a history expert, but I think the Franco-Prussian War is underrated as far as influential wars go.
8. As Time Goes By by Mary Higgins Clark
Mary Higgins Clark is known by some as the “Queen of Suspense.” That’s a great nickname, if you’re into royalty (and suspense). I wonder if other female authors who write suspense novels get annoyed that Mary Higgins Clark is the “Queen of Suspense.” Does Nora Roberts get mad? I’m sure Nora Roberts has written suspense novels; she’s written over 200 novels, so some of them have to be suspenseful.
9. All the Light We Cannot See by Anthony Doerr
I would call this the To Kill a Mockingbird of books, except that would be comparing a book to another book. What I mean is that nobody I know dislikes or hates either book. A lot of people have read (or are reading) All the Light We Cannot See, and I haven’t heard many negative comments about it. I rarely hear negative comments about To Kill a Mockingbird either. Other than that (and that Pulitzer Prize for Fiction thing), I don’t think the two books are much alike.
10. Miller’s Valley by Anna Quindlen
This novel seems to be about a family with secrets in a small town (which maybe has some secrets too), but the blurbs don’t tell me much about the book. In a way, I’d like to know more about Miller’s Valley, but then again, I complain when the blurbs give away too much. There are a lot of books out there about families and secrets and small towns and secrets, and I’d like to know what makes this novel different from other novels about families with secrets in small towns. Maybe Anna Quindlen’s writing is what makes the difference.
*****
What do you think? Which of these May best sellers do you think will end up on summer reading lists? Which books are most likely to plummet? What war (other than World War II) would you set your novel in?
*****
The true story of one writer’s moment of high school glory! And it all happened because of…
Only 99 cents on the Amazon Kindle!
Putting your work-in-progress on the writer’s block is never a good idea. (image via wikimedia)
Writer’s block can be an author’s worst enemy. As an aspiring author, I’ve learned how to deal with writer’s block, but since I’m not a famous (or a particularly successful) author, nobody really cares about my opinion about it. I understand that. Maybe successful authors are more credible sources about writer’s block that I am.
Theoretically, a published author should be able to explain how to deal with writer’s block better than a part-time blogger like me. Unfortunately, as we shall soon see, successful writers don’t always give the best advice about writing and writer’s block.
What is writer’s block?
“Writer’s block is just another name for fear.” ― Jacob Nordby, author of a bunch of self-help books
I don’t know much about Jacob Nordby, but this is one of the worst explanations of writer’s block I’ve heard. I know a lot about fear. After all, I’m scared and worried about many things. But even though I feel a lot of emotions (excitement, frustration, anger, exhilaration) when I write, fear isn’t one of them.
The only time I feel fear during the writing process is when somebody is reading my work right in front of me, but that hasn’t happened in over 20 years. With a blog, I never get to see a reader’s reaction. If somebody leaves a comment on my blog telling me that I suck, I’m glad to have gotten a reaction. But if somebody tells me to my face that I suck, it hurts my feelings.
I think a better explanation is that writer’s block is your brain saying “I’m not going to be creative today.” It’s when you want to write and your brain won’t let you. And why would anybody be scared about writing?
What do you do when you get writer’s block?
“Writing about a writer’s block is better than not writing at all” ― Charles Bukowski, author of weird poetry and fiction
If Charles Bukowski says it’s okay, then maybe it’s okay to write about writer’s block, but only as a last resort. It’s like the student who writes a story about not being able to think of a story to write about and then he/she wakes up and it’s all a dream. You don’t want to write a story like that, but sometimes you don’t have a choice.
Whenever I get writer’s block, instead of writing about writer’s block, I just quit until I feel more rested. But maybe writing about writer’s block isn’t a bad idea.
Just so you know, I’m not writing about writer’s block because I have it. I don’t have writer’s block. I have what I think should be called editor’s block. I’m writing a lot of stuff, but I haven’t been successful fixing much of it. My mind has been going blank whenever I’ve been making corrections and adding/deleting word/phrases. This lack of editing has left me with a bunch of substandard drafts that don’t meet my blog’s standards. I know a piece of writing isn’t very good if it doesn’t meet my blog’s standards. I’ve never seen editor’s block before, so maybe I’ll copyright it and see if I can sue somebody when they use without my permission.
What does getting writer’s block say about you as a writer?
“Writer’s block is for people who have the luxury of time.”- Jody Picoult, famous author of a bunch of best selling novels that make people cry
“Luxury of time?” This contradicts everything I know about writer’s block. The only reason writer’s block is a problem is because writers have deadlines (and no time to meet them). If a writer has a lot of time, he/she could quit when writer’s block struck. If you have the luxury of time, you don’t care about writer’s block.
Even though I’d love to be a successful author, I’m glad I’m not a professional writer because I could see myself getting writer’s block at the worst possible moments. And then if I couldn’t conquer writer’s block, I’d get fired. I don’t really care if I get writer’s block now because my blog won’t fire me.
I guess my lack of fear of writer’s block causes me not to have it. Maybe that Jacob Nordby guy was onto something after all.
Why do people get writer’s block?
“There’s no such thing as writer’s block. That was invented by people in California who couldn’t write.” ― Terry Pratchett, famous author of a bunch of humorous fantasy novels
At first, I thought Pratchett was full of crap (Remember, Crap is NOT a Bad Word!), but maybe he is on to something. According to Merriam Webster, the term writer’s block was first used in 1950. California became a state in 1850. It’s possible that somebody in California invented writer’s block. I’m surprised it didn’t exist before 1950, though. We’d had centuries of writers before 1950, and it took that long before somebody became afflicted with writer’s block. It kind of makes sense; a lot of afflictions were created in the 20th century.
I don’t like people who make up afflictions, but I also dislike people who deny that afflictions exist. Maybe Terry Pratchett never experienced writer’s block, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. When I was a kid, I suffered from motion sickness, and the rest of my family told me it was all in my head. That ticked me off. Now I know that there’s a logical physiological(?) reason that I got motion sickness, and it wasn’t my imagination or me psyching myself out.
If Terry Pratchett didn’t believe in writer’s block, he might not have believed in motion sickness either, and I bet he really wouldn’t have believed in editor’s block.
*****
What do you think? What other questions about writer’s block do you want answered by the pros? Is editor’s block a real thing, or is it all in my head? What do you do when you get writer’s block?
If you’re going to buy this book, get it soon (before Pulitzer puts its name all over the cover).
Whenever a new Pulitzer Prize for Fiction winner is announced, it’s a good idea to go out and buy a copy of the book right away. In a few weeks, the only available copies will have a giant ribbon/blurb on the cover that announces that the book is a Pulitzer Prize winner. After that, it’s tough to find a Pulitzer Prize winning book without the Pulitzer Prize on it. You might have to go to some used book stores. But it’s worth it.
I don’t blame the book publishers for putting the Pulitzer announcement on the book covers. The Pulitzer Prize adds a lot of prestige to a book. But I like having novels without the Prize on the cover. I like to read books before they win awards or are turned into movies. And if I haven’t read them, then I like to pretend that I have.
Here are recent recipients of the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction. It might be tough to find copies without the Pulitzer on the cover, but it’s probably still possible:
2016 The Sympathizer by Viet Thanh Nguyen
As soon as I heard that The Sympathizer had won the 2016 Pulitzer Prize for Fiction, I ran out to the local B&M Bookseller to purchase a copy. I might not ever read The Sympathizer, but I can always brag that I read the book before it won the Pulitzer. After all, I have a copy that was printed before the Pulitzer announcement had been made. I can say I was ahead of the times. I was the trend setter. Yeah, I run the risk of looking like a book snob (and maybe a liar), but people respect book snobs.
2015 All the Light We Cannot See by Anthony Doerr
I write about this book a lot because it’s always on the best sellers lists when I do my monthly review. I haven’t read All the Light We Cannot See, but I know a lot of people who have (or claimed to have read it), and nobody I know despises this book. Usually a Pulitzer brings about a ton of extra criticism, but I haven’t seen any post-Pulitzer backlash for this like I’ve seen from other winners (especially The Goldfinch and A Visit from the Goon Squad).
If a book can be a long-term bestseller AND a Pulitzer Prize winner and NOT get post-award backlash, then that book must be AWESOME (except saying it’s AWESOME would be setting expectations too high and cause more undeserved backlash).
2014 The Goldfinch by Donna Tartt
This is what I’m talking about, a polarizing Pulitzer Prize winner that’s been a bestseller for a long time. A lot of readers love it, and a lot of readers hate it. Readers complain that it’s too long, too slow, and has sections that don’t make sense or contribute to the story. Others say the book is brilliant. Being “brilliant” implies that that readers who complain about the book just don’t get it. Readers who complain about it might say they “get” it but it’s not as brilliant as readers who love it say it is.
I haven’t read it. By my standards, it’s pretty long.
2013 The Orphan Master’s Son by Adam Johnson
North Korea is a rare setting for a novel, and the author uses a bunch of literary devices to describe all the horrible stuff going on there, so it’s more than just a laundry list of human rights abuses. I don’t like reading about human rights abuses, even when I know they’re fictional.
In The Orphan Master’s Son, the orphan master treats his son more harshly than the orphans in his care. That’s how it goes. When I was growing up, a friend of mine’s mom was a teacher, and one year he had to be in his mom’s class for the whole year, and he was miserable because she was always on his case. I’m sure it wasn’t as bad as being an orphan master’s son in North Korea, but still.
2012 No Award
I respect an award where there isn’t always a winner (or recipient). There shouldn’t always be a winner just because there’s an award available. There should be standards, by God!! If no novel written in 2012 meets those standards, then so be it. I wish the Heisman Trophy (for college football) had a No Award option.
2011 A Visit from the Goon Squad by Jennifer Egan
As a writer, you can’t go wrong with a metaphor as a title. As a reader, I can get confused with metaphors because I’m kind of literal. When I read A Visit from the Goon Squad, I was expecting an actual goon squad. I like books with goon squads. I don’t like goon squads in real life because they’re dangerous, but I like goon squads in literature because they make books interesting. Just so you know, there are no real goon squads in A Visit from the Goon Squad. I hope that doesn’t spoil anything.
2010 Tinkers by Paul Harding
Here’s another polarizing Pulitzer winner. Readers either love it or hate it. Some critics call it poetic, and other say the author tried too hard. I know what those critics mean. In this novel an old man is on his death bed thinking about his life with his family around him. It seems like a common idea.
I’ve read books and seen movies with that concept, but Tinkers uses a lot of metaphors regarding clocks and time. Some critics say the author tried too hard to make this book deep, but Tinkers won a Pulitzer, so who cares? If I’m the author and I’ve won a Pulitzer, I don’t care if critics say I tried too hard. Trying too hard shows you care. It’s better than not trying hard enough.
2009 Olive Kitteridge by Elizabeth Strout
When a book title is a character’s name, I sometimes get confused. Did Elizabeth Strout write Olive Kitteridge? Or did Olive Kitteridge write Elizabeth Strout? Elizabeth Strout would have been a cool fictional name, and Olive Kitteridge would be a cool author’s name. At least when Jane Austen wrote Emma, she didn’t give Emma a last name. If Emma had been given a last name, I might have gotten Jane and Emma confused too.
2008 The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao by Junot Diaz
This is the opposite of Olive Kitteridge. Take a character’s name and add a bunch of adjectives to it. Plus, there are tons of pop cultural references in this book. I wonder how it will hold up 20, 50, even 100 years from now. When somebody reads The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao in 2108, will readers be turned off by all the references that are no longer in the cultural lexicon? That’s the thing about being a Pulitzer Prize winner; it’s forever. At least, it’s forever as long as people still read books.
2007 The Road by Cormac McCarthy
It’s short. It’s about the post-apocalypse. The characters have no names. It’s kind of depressing. But after you read it, you can brag that you’ve read yet another Pulitzer Prize winning novel.
A post-Apocalyptic Pulitzer Prize winner? You’d think I’d have more to say about it.
2006 March by Geraldine Brooks
I had never heard of this novel until I started researching for this blog post. I don’t know if that’s a reflection of my ignorance or a reflection of this prize winner’s obscurity. I initially didn’t know if March was referring to the month or a verb. If it was about a march during March, that would make March a clever title. I was disappointed to find out that March was the protagonist’s name. Ugh.
Then I found out that the protagonist is the absentee father from Little Women. I know Little Women is public domain and today’s authors can do what they want without permission, but I was surprised that the Pulitzer committee would consider a novel based on a classic. It almost seems like cheating, but I guess Pulitzer disagrees.
*****
What do you think? Which Pulitzer Prize winning novel have you read? Which one are you most likely to read? Does winning a prestigious award even matter to you? Which award means more to you than the Pulitzer?
*****
I wrote a story. I read it in front of my class. And then a bunch of weird stuff happened (but I didn’t win a Pulitzer).
Only 99 cents on the Amazon Kindle!
