Showing posts with label grammar. Show all posts
Showing posts with label grammar. Show all posts

Thursday, May 31, 2012

The Hunger Games Isn't Good.

The Hunger Games has so much potential. I keep wishing that it was written by someone else, someone who knows how to construct a sentence, preferably.



Now, don't get me wrong -- I'm not such a stickler for grammar that I believe you have to be technically perfect in prose. I would not enjoy literature, if that were the case. But to be a good writer, I truly believe that you must deeply understand the structures and systems of your language, and I don't think that Suzanne Collins does.

English teachers often say something along the lines of, "You can't break the rules until you know them." And they are right. It is not until you have a true grasp on grammar that you can stray from the rules and still be intelligible. To me, that is ultimately the most important rule for writers: be clear.

I am a very concise writer. My academic papers are never the required number of pages. Ever. You want 20 pages? I'm giving you 17. Max. I spend a lot of time carefully crafting each sentence so that I never have to say the same thing twice. Being grammatically correct allows me to get my point across in a simple, readable manner. There's no bull-shitting or rambling (I save that for my blog), just digestible information.


On the other hand,  I understand that being grammatically incorrect allows writers to develop their style and voice. Good writers can write technically terrible sentences and still get their point across, in a pretty way, no less. Fragments, for example, can be stylish and useful. I use them a lot myself. So does Suzanne Collins. But the problem is that her use of fragments is not stylish--it's sloppy. I frequently have to reread her paragraphs to figure out what it is she's trying to say. And that is one of my biggest aggravations with the trilogy: it is rushed and messy. It lacks so much.

The thing is, I actually really like the idea of The Hunger Games -- its plot and themes, and the dystopian setting, which is SO HOT RIGHT NOW (at least in my opinion). But that is why it is so utterly disappointing. I feel like a great idea has been wasted. And, perhaps more importantly, so has my time.

Yet, for some unknown reason (or because I liked the first movie), I'm finishing the series. I'm halfway through Mockingjay, and frustrated and disgusted enough to spend an hour writing this post (seriously, one hour), but alas, I persist. I can't wait until it's over.

Read this. It's much, much better.

Friday, February 10, 2012

My Blogger Promise

As you have probably learned from reading this blog, I may or may not ever have a boyfriend. But, I promise with all of my heart that if I ever do have one, I will never, ever refer to him as "The Boyfriend" or "The Boy" (see also: "The Husband" and "Hubby"). 


This is an obnoxious thing bloggers and people on Facebook do. Not only is it annoying, but it's also grammatically inappropriate.  Boyfriend is not a proper noun. Ever. It's just a regular old noun. And, under (almost) no circumstance does it require a demonstrative adjective. Your boyfriend is not the only boyfriend of the world; he is your boyfriend. Just yours*. Congratulations. 


He also has a name, so use it. We'll be able to figure out using context clues that Bob, who lives with you and eats the food you make, is your boyfriend. So, don't worry -- everyone will still know that you have one! 


Or, if you're too afraid to say his name on the internet, then don't fucking talk about him because chances are none of your readers give a shit anyway. I came to your blog to get a pie recipe not to hear about your relationship.



Deep breath.


As you can see, using "The Boyfriend" is one of my pet peeves. Right up there with people you're not related to saying things like, "Mom says hi." No. Your mom says hi. We're not siblings. That would be fucking disgusting considering what we just did.





*Unless of course he's cheating on you, in which case, sucks to be you.