Are you trying to kill me?

I mean, seriously.

What inspired you to write the book? To take on a social issue that is sometimes overlooked. That issue was Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PSDT).

I have to admit he's right on this one: PSDT is very often overlooked. Even when talking about posttraumatic stress disorder, you never seem to hear about PSDT.

And no, this is not a typo, nor is this an issue of translation. He uses this acronym several times throughout his questionnaire, including on the final question:

What sets your book apart? The book does deal with several aspects of PSDT of which I have researched a great deal.

So you researched this a great deal. Really. Because you don't even know what this condition is actually called. So that kind of leads to an issue with your credibility, doesn't it? Or perhaps you researched PSDT a great deal, which is also problematic for a book about posttraumatic stress disorder.

Personally, I'm hoping he did a great deal of research about Privalomojo Sveikatos Draudimo Tarybos.

Another colloquialism gone awry

One of the most amusing parts of my job is reading what people think typical colloquialisms actually say. Yes, we all know the ones like for all intensive purposes. But what about don't lick a gift horse in the mouth or Chester drawers instead of chest of drawers? 

Today's is more subtle, but it entertains me nonetheless. The phrase is for Christ's sake. As in, for the good/advantage/wellbeing of Christ. It's not for Christ Sake. 

Given the capitalization, I can only assume that whatever we're doing is not for the good of Jesus Christ; it is to obtain a specific brand of fermented rice alcohol.

Segue to a Backstory

As she looked around at her surroundings, her thoughts drifted to her life up to that point.

So her thoughts drifted to...her thoughts, basically. Good. Let's go with that. It sounds a lot better than this:

As she looked at stuff, she thought about a convenient segue to her backstory. 

Why do I read this crap?

I have no idea why I read my local NBC affiliate's website. But this one is just brilliant. 

Blackshades, we’re not talking about sunglasses. I'd like to know what journalism school is teaching this sort of grammar. A comma here makes no sense at all. Are you talking to someone named Blackshades? That's all I can guess. In fact, the total opposite. So we're talking about the total opposite of sunglasses. Of course. It's a type of malware that has made national headlines, and is making some people think twice about what they do in front of their computer. Oh, right. Because apparently malware is the opposite of sunglasses. I can see the universe in which that makes sense. 

Nick Davis is an I.T. Security Architect at UW-Madison, and says it's easy for a hacker to break into your device. I love the fact that this journalist feels the need to use commas and conjunctions to join incomplete sentences. That's totally a thing.

"You'll receive an email from someone you don't know, but it will seem like a legitimate email. You’ll click on the attachment, and nothing will happen. But in the background, very quietly the malware blackshades, will install itself on your computer,” said Davis. I'm confused. What's with the comma after blackshades? And should that be capitalized? That asshole Davis must not have specified in his quote.

Blackshades made headlines last year. Complete sentence. Good job. After a college student hacked into Miss Teen USA’s web cam, spying, snapping naked photos and even blackmailing her. Not a complete sentence. Bad job.

"It allows an attacker to remotely enable your web cam on your laptop, or your desktop machine and then it sends pictures to them from a remote location,” said Davis. So you thought you should put a comma before or, despite it not being used as a conjunction, but you didn't feel like putting a comma before the conjunction and. I just don't get it.

It doesn't stop there.Well, I'd hope not. This would be a pretty short, boring article.

“I do all my banking online, like investing is online, I pay all my credit card bills online,” said UW-Madison student, Erin Jamar. This is a great quote. Note how the verb tenses stay the same, and there are no comma splices? Yes, that was sarcasm.

Once blackshades is installed, Davis says hackers can get to those too. So you installed blackshades, and then Davis said this? Probably not. Perhaps there should be a comma after Davis says. 

"You can't be 100% sure that your computer isn't infected, and I always tell people, if you can't be sure your computer isn't infected, you have to operate under the presumption that it is infected,” said Davis. This is good advice about anything. I can't be sure I really exist, so I should probably operate under the presumption that I don't. Or something. Also, presumption?

So how do you protect yourself from an attack? Um...scientology?

Davis says, the best way is to keep two separate devices in your home. Using one to surf the web, and the other to access sensitive accounts. No, guys. The comma should have gone after Davis says in that previous sentences. Here it makes no sense. Oh, wait. That second sentence isn't even a sentence. We've completely given up on trying to make sense at this point, haven't we?

"People need to learn to treat there computers as if they are underneath a public eye, because they are connected to a public network,” said Davis. I'm imagining a very large public eye with a bunch of people standing underneath it. Probably these people have there computers with them. Other fun fact: because does not require a comma. But let's be real here. That's hardly the biggest problem with this sentence.

A good lesson, but one hard to follow, in this complex internet age, where everyone thinks they're not the next target. I assume commas are like government budgets. It's the end of the article, and the guy has all these commas left over. If he doesn't shove them all into this sentence, then he loses all his commas for his next article.

"I would still have that invincible mentality. You know, it's not going to happen to me, it hasn't happened to anyone I know, even though it's obviously not true,” said Jamar. I don't know the point of this. Did this happen to Jamar? The article didn't say anything about her. In fact, the article didn't really say anything about anything. Here. I'll rewrite it for you.

Blackshades is a computer virus. It is bad.

I'm brilliant.

Subtle

"The weatherman said a storm is coming soon. He’s probably right. I wonder how long it will last." It was a dry comment in spite of the dark clouds that formed along the skyline. She wasn’t speaking about the weather.

Translation:

IT'S A METAPHOR, Y'ALL!!!

Another brilliant questionnaire

I'm not sure there's a single sentence in today's questionnaire that isn't ridiculous. This isn't even funny to me; it's just depressing. Hopefully you'll find it funny, though. At least some good could come of this.

Theme: As the collection of short stories all have various themes, not bound by any comminality. 

There has to be a theme. I get that they're short stories, but you can't just shove a bunch of words together and call it a book. That's ridiculous.

Summary: Short stories that broach many different genres - from humourist to philisophical. 

At this point I'm giving him props for spelling short and stories correctly. I see nothing humourist about it.

Target audience: litary readers

Hm. Since litary is not a thing, does that mean his target audience is no one?

Specific tone, themes, and mood you would like to convey to your readers: Tone and approve varry from piece to piece.

He spelled vary wrong. Seriously. That's more disturbing than the fact that this sentence makes no sense at all.

Who do you envision buying and reading your book: ?

To be fair, I assume this means the writer has realized that although he'd like litary readers to read his book, that's not likely to happen.

What sets your book apart: You tell me

I'm thinking you probably don't want me to tell you.

The fish?

So my awesome new book features this baffling conversation:

"So you bait your own hook?"

"Sure. After all, if one can't bait their hook and take the fish off then one can't legitimately say they fish."

"So you use night crawlers too?"

"Those aren't meant for fishing."

"Sure they are. The fish loves them. Don't tell me you're afraid of them?"

OK, first of all, I can't think of a better place to demonstrate when to use their inappropriately. One is undeniably singular. Their is plural. You cannot say one can't bait their hook or one can't say they fish. If you're going to use the singular one, you need to use he or she. In this case, it's a woman, so it should be if one can't bait her hook and one can't say she fishes. 

Second, your character is a linguist. She should know this. 

Third, this is ridiculously sexist. Yes, a single woman who goes fishing can bait her own hook. Stop being an ass.

And then we come to the really baffling part. The fish loves them. I can't even begin to comprehend why this is singular. I guess the only answer is that she is this girl:

That woman's body is mocking me!

Her body was lean and taunt.

So is the body taunting him, or is that a command?

I'm sure she also has curves in all the write places.

Sigh.

Today's book is probably a mystery or something. Pretty sure I'm trying to solve the mystery of what the hell is going on. So far, nothing.

Anyway, I just thought I'd share this because it's so unique.

Her past, like her shadow, was always with her.

Combine that with using smarted as a synonym for said, and basically I hate you.

Welcome back, I guess

I'm about to embark on my first project in over a month. Apparently the author is just as excited as I am because his book title has an exclamation point in it. Seriously. 

So that's kind of a bad sign. Also a bad sign: his biography.

[Author] was born on a dark and stormy, cold and wintry night in1956, the scene fittingly and fleetingly lit by powerful and blinding flashes of Lightning, almost immediately followed by the deafening rapid cannon-fire explosions of Thunder. His sweat soaked and red-faced mother looked down upon her new-born son for the first time with a gentle, smiling and tender look, and then screamed!

I often debate the appropriateness of swearing profusely on my blog because I feel like I should probably be able to come up with more creative ways of expressing myself. But then sometimes this happens.

Fuck. Seriously. Just...fuck.

Phrasing

The NFL may want to think about rephrasing this one, especially with all the backlash over this issue:

Violations regarding assault, battery, domestic violence or sexual assault that involve physical force "will be subject to a suspension without pay of six games for a first offense." 

Of course my first thought was, "When can sexual assault not involve physical force?" Then I was momentarily upset. Then I reread the sentence several times and realized what they mean is this:

Violations that involve physical force, such as assault, battery, domestic violence, or sexual assault, "will be subject to a suspension without pay of six games for a first offense."

That's a bit of a difference.

My brain is numb

My new book features many issues with misused words. Some are homophones, and some are slight misspellings or misplaced letters. And then some are just completely wrong. Here are a couple of the best ones I've come across. I'm going to update this one as I go, but seriously, you should probably read these now.

He was wearing a cut of shirt. I wonder if he's also wearing cut of shorts.

You're going to have to search the chicken coup. I really wish I could draw. This would be amazing. I assume the chicken coup happens in conjunction with gorilla warfare. 

I see you harassing any of those pour little freshman, you’ll have to answer to me. Seriously? How do you screw this one up?

There was a slight breeze blowing, rustling the lose strands of hay that tumbled along past her. People write loose when they mean lose quite frequently, but I really don't think I've ever seen it the other way around. Bizarre.

...he exclaimed, hoping up and down on the Skipper. You could probably hope up and down, right? I'm sure that means something.

With a team of amazing sculptures, we have constructed a representative figure of one of the most influential guardians. A whole bunch of statues helped make this. 

The man represented the principals of the guardians. Remember, guardians: a principal is your pal. 

Katie padded her brother’s back. For, like, a football game, or what?

She thought about it and shuttered. Oh, come on.

He looked out the window at the residence, walking to some sort of normalcy that this city tried to maintain. This whole section was so confusing it took me several sentences to realize it should be residents. Still doesn't really make sense, though, does it?

Within were skeletons draped in raged torn garb. The clothing was super pissed about the skeletons being dead.

Well, I don’t want to be squired. I'm going to squire some vegetables tonight and make kabobs. 

She turned and saw another huge gray rat with bucked teeth staring back at her. I'd try to draw this one, but I don't even know what bucked teeth would look like.

The head of the snake boar down. Snake boar? That sounds terrifying!

It will sound distant, like an echo, so make sure you extenuate your words. OK, now this is just getting ridiculous. Extenuate? Really?

She flayed, awkwardly flying across the deep crevice. Flailed? Splayed? No fucking clue.

She wore an elegant white toga, sandals, and a Loral wreath upon her crown. I'm pretty sure he meant Loreal. 

All data regarding its use was either deleted or never imputed into my memory. Need more impute! 

His expression was sullied. He had mud on his face? Or possibly he was just a big disgrace?

The laboratory was filled with beakers, measuring equipment, cauldrons, pots, potions, rabbits, containers of multi-colored liquids, and glass contraptions. I have no idea what the word should be, but rabbits can't possibly be right, can it?

He tiptoed through the woods with bent knees, pressing the ball of his foot down slowly, followed by his heal. I saw this one coming as soon as I read the word foot. Side note: why is he hopping on one foot?

The comment took her back. Back to where? The future? 

He had broad shoulders, well-defined muscles, and high-cheek bones. Perhaps this means his bones are very cheeky?

She watched his eyes dart, as if trying to think frantically. "I have no idea what you're talking about," he answered whimsically. This is another one where I have no idea what he means, but whimsically definitely is not the word he's looking for.

She pulled into their driveway, and slammed on the breaks. Yeah, saw this one coming.

The floor gave a shutter, and then descended. I know I've included one of these, but I really love the image of the floor giving a shutter. Does a shutter come out of the floor, or what?

It was the same symbol that she’d scene in the ancient pyramid. I just don't get paid enough for this.

She had a splint second to make a decision. Seriously, how is this book not over yet? 

He wore a black, perfectly starched uniform that was decorated with metals. Like molybdenum or tungsten? 

Now, give me the anecdote. Once upon a time...

An orange light glowed through the narrow windows, casting an eerie evanescence. OK, evanescence is defined as a vanishing away. So this almost makes sense. But the light glowing can't cast a vanishing away. Right? So this can't be the correct word. Right? Right?

Plot twist!

Ridiculous news:

She went back to a time when the room seemed much cleaner and more organized. 

So there's time travel.

Import and export of dryads is strictly forbidden on Earth. 

And there are aliens. 

This is getting ridiculous.

Another gem

Summer is busy time for writers, apparently. Or "writers," possibly. At any rate, after turning down the vampire atrocity, I was offered a book that comes from this genre:

murder mystery set in an unusual place with some what initially seems to be fantastic or fantasy creatures, until once learns in a simple style form the locals that others with powers based on technology beyond the main characters knowledge are really involved in what is going on.

So...humans from the future?

Also, I'm pretty sure I told my superiors that I wouldn't take any books from this specific genre. 

Here's the plot of this book from what we affectionately call the MMSIAUPWSWISTBFOFCUOLIASSFTLTOWPBOTBTMCKARIIWIGO genre:

ask for this separately I don't have one here now I WANT THE EDITING TO START

Yikes. I purposely sat on this one for a day before turning it down just to fuck with this guy.

Here's what he suggests for the interior of the book:

A FONT that has been used in fantasy and science fiction possibly scurlock

So your book is sci-fi/fantasy? Huh. That sounds a lot easier than MMSIAUPWSWISTBFOFCUOLIASSFTLTOWPBOTBTMCKARIIWIGO. Just saying.

Also, what the hell is scurlock? Is this a word I should know? I'm assuming he meant the font scurlock, which you can download for free here. Probably don't use this for an entire book. 

And finally, at the end of the questionnaire:

There is a roman background, romans translocated from earth.

In other words:

Humans from the future. 

A poem

I've rewritten Falcor's musings from yesterday as a free-verse poem. Enjoy. It's called will.

will

in will

will

will be as though he will go

you—later he

refer to "try"

try!

and you and you…

will you?

will you?

you will.

is not a great stopper

but you, Dragon—

hi to the words coming—

will.

Phantom Dragon!

I just got a new computer and immediately set Falcor up so we can reacquaint ourselves. When I put my headset down and walked away, this is what Falcor came up with all on his own:

Will in will will will will will will will will will will will will will will will will will will will will will be as though he will go you later he refer to try try and you and you will you will you you will is not a greater stopper but you Dragon hi to the words coming will

I have no idea what this means exactly, but it appears my speech recognition software has become sentient.

Falcor also resents being called "it." He prefers male pronouns.

This is terrifying.

Tic tac toe

I don't often get good books. That's no secret. But I'm pretty sure my new assignment gives me three in a row of complete, utter bullshit. Here are some highlights from the client questionnaire:

Provide a thorough summary of your book.

Sorry guy's can't summarize a very complex plot in under 30,000 words.

Great start. You can't write a summary of your own book. Well, here. Let me summarize it for you: another fucking vampire book.

Describe the specific tone, themes, and mood you would like your book to convey to readers.

OK, this is multi-faceted. Here's the partial list:

Light-hearted

Seriously tragic

Gothic

Intellectual

Awe-inspiring etc

There 

is tragic love, revenge, horrific brutality and triumph over extreme adversity. 

But wait! There's more! Characters will also be happy, sad, mad, mildly irritated, anxious, perplexed, sleepy, and constipated. And if you order in the next twenty minutes, you'll also get hungry, spicy, husky, throbbing, and smirk. 

Side note: I do love light-hearted horrific brutality.

To which books would you most like to see your work compared? Which author(s) in your genre do you admire?

Author Franz Kafka - the characters in my book are subject to unpredictable horror and tragedy.

Kafka?! You're comparing yourself to fucking Kafka?

Describe your target audience by factors such as age group, interests, education, gender, etc. 

Vampire fans. Millennials (18 - 30 y.o.) Fans of Twilight. The book may possibly turn out to be very popular among girls/women as strong, intelligent women are integral to the plot.

Clearly this author is male. I can't wait to read what he thinks a "strong, intelligent woman" looks like.

Is there a rule you would like for your editor to disregard because you have purposefully gone against convention in your manuscript?

If a sentence which is grammatically incorrect, it's most likely because I intended it that way because the grammatically correct version would seem stilted.

I have intentionally omitted many commas to maintain good flow. I've used apostrophes to keep the readers' flow.

Read that first sentence again. So you're telling me that would have sounded stilted if you'd written it so it actually made sense?

I also assume the use of "guy's" in the summary question is to "keep the readers' flow." 

Or perhaps this guy is a fucking moron. Grammar does not bend to your will, asshole.

What sets your book apart?

There are too many ways to spoil plot twists in this book - there are a lot of plot twists.

I'll bet there's a werewolf. In vampire books, "plot twist" always means there's a werewolf.

What aspects of your writing are unique and define you as an author?

I want them to actually THINK about things sometimes. I also want them to have to look up the meaning of a word - like we did in the old days.

You know what millennials love? Being talked down to. I'm seriously loving it right now. That's right, asshat. Your editor is a milennial. Plot twist!

Description by omission

I guess I can  understand now why this author does all her descriptions in place of pronouns rather than as part of the narrative. Check this out:

"This must be important to you," he said, not unkindly.

Um, that's not actually a description. That's like if someone said, "What do you look like?" and I replied, "Well, I don't have black hair, my eyes aren't yellow, and I'm certainly not a narwhal." I'm pretty sure a sketch artist would have a hell of a time figuring out what I look like from that description.

Ew.

It seems bad writers really like to write about sex, which means I've edited a lot of really bad sex scenes. Usually it's just a bunch of talk about manhoods and womanhoods and throbbing members and speaking huskily to one another. That left me with a lot of hope for this book, in which there are no manhooods or throbbing members. But this author really just takes the ick to another level. I'm not sure if it's the use of passive voice or the omission of most pronouns or possibly just the awful choice of words, but this has to be the most disgusting sex scene I've ever read. I'd like to just include the entire thing, but that's probably rude or illegal or something. So here are some highlights:

She feasted on her neck. There is nothing inherently wrong with this. I've read plenty of vampire romance novels that use the same terminology. But the fact that the author must say feasted when what she probably means is kissed or potentially sucked is pretty much a bad sign of things to come.

Two deep pools of want urging her on. There is no indication what body part this refers to. While I assume it means her eyes, for some reason it reminds me of my high school softball coach telling us we were swimming in the cesspool of mediocrity. I assume a deep pool of want is much like a cesspool of mediocrity.

She worshipped both breasts. Again, word choice. This makes me think she was probably chanting "We're not worthy" and doing the whole Wayne's World thing.

A soft mound. Apparently this means her breast. Yeah, I was surprised too.

Cupped her mound. Apparently this does not mean her breast. So it turns out mound can refer to any slight protrusion on the body. No word on if this is unisex or not.

She deposited her precious load on the bed. This is a lesbian sex scene. There will be no depositing of loads.

She was deposited tenderly on the bed. Oh, so we're going to stick with that one, huh?

The CEO felt a hand slither around her thigh. Slither? 

The buttock was cupped firmly. See, passive is just weird here. Also, buttock is about the least sexy term ever, especially when used in the singular.

Using her hands to mold and massage buttocks on her journey. See? Really not sexy. Also, whose buttocks? The idea of disembodied buttocks is even less sexy.

Questing fingers found their sensitive target. Whose fingers? And are those adjectives really necessary? 

Engorged bundle of nerves. Ugh, I take it back. There is a less sexy term than buttock. Also, fun fact: nerves and blood vessels are two different things.

Viscose-like moisture. Ew. Just ew. Also, viscous is totally a word.

Her lover’s folds were glistening with her desire. Seriously, is there no other way to put this that doesn't sound disgusting?

Between the blonde’s folds. Nope. Folds is just inherently a gross word.

She slid her fingertip into her warmth. This might be worse than folds. OK, maybe not, but still. Ew.

She plunged slowly. I get what she's saying here, but I just feel like the lack of manhood could have meant the avoidance of words like plunged.

Feeling the tight canal. A man. A plan. A canal. Panama. Oh, except there's no man. And canal is not a word I will be able to use in civilized conversation again.

Without releasing her delicious treat from her mouth. I have no idea what this refers to, but for sure some body part currently in my possession is being compared to a headless rodent or possibly one of those Beggin' Strips things.

This irresistible treat. Why does she keep using the word treat? What does that even mean? 

This heavenly task. Stop with the adjectives! They're weird. And for some reason the repeated use of the word this really freaks me out too.

Drank in the taste of her lover’s liquid heat. 

So anyway, that's my day. How are you?

How to be descriptive

Here's a fantastic example of how to write emotions*:

Anger, agony, shame, hope, and finally devastation came across the weary face.

Because listing generic emotions totally convinces me of what the character is feeling and paints a vivid mental picture of how this particular character demonstrates these emotions.

*This is sarcasm. This is actually a hideously awful example.

I seriously want to reach through my computer screen and punch someone

The tall woman grinned at the sheepish grin the blonde gave her.

No, really. That's a real line I just read.

I should be laughing...

This should be funny to me, but I just feel sort of empty inside. Perhaps I've become desensitized. 

“Great!” the bouncy tower of womanhood grinned.

Honestly, I was more frustrated by the fact that grinned is not actually a speaker tag. It's like the words bouncy tower of womanhood don't even faze me anymore.

Synonyms for said

Smirked is not a synonym for said. Nor is grinned, smiled, or winked. You cannot smirk, grin, smile, or wink a word. Go ahead. Try it.

And no, "But Stephenie Meyer did it," is not ever a valid reason for anything. Ever.

Dashed hopes

Whenever I get a new project, I get this little rush of excitement. Maybe this will be a good one! Maybe this time I won't get mad and scream at the computer monitor for two weeks straight! Then when I read the client questionnaire and it's written in complete sentences and includes legitimate questions and concerns about the book, I get even more excited.

And then I open the file and briefly scroll to a couple of different pages throughout the book, just to get an idea of what I'm looking at.

That, my friends, is when my hopes are dashed on the rocks like a thing that is dashed on a different, harder thing.

A very basic first glance of this one includes one of the characters being referred to as:

the tall woman
the brunette
the CEO
the six-foot-tall woman
the brave woman

Yes, I now know that my main character is female, brunette, six feet tall, and the CEO of some company.

I also know I'm going to hate this book, as it's likely written by someone who thinks she can write because she owns every Dan Brown book.

The editor's excitement had faded like color fading from an old photograph that once had color in it.

Deal-breaker

If you use the word huskily, I will not read your book.

Lots of planets have a north

Some transcriptionists have a lot of trouble with accents, which results in a lot of fun for me when I'm editing the transcripts. This particular speaker sounds like she's from northern England (but I could be wrong; lots of planets have a north) and is talking about developmental psychology. Here are a couple of gems:

The notion of seeking just a unitary self is actually a full swan.

If you've ever heard an interview with the Beatles, you probably can understand this one. The notion is a false one, not a full swan. I'm not sure what a full swan notion is, but it sounds entertaining to me.

Bonus points for anyone who read that last sentence and thought, "Shouldn't it be full-swan notion?"

I think the bit I’m wanting to move away from is the notion that the child part of self only consists of our cake experience.

I really see no problem with basing my sense of self solely on my experiences with cake. Although I'll admit I'm a little confused how someone could have heard our cake twice and thought that made more sense than archaic in this context.

Magic with adjectives

Today I'm going to teach you how to make an ordinary, everyday phrase into an adjective. It'll be fun. I promise.

This super-amazing, magical power is used when a phrase is longer than one word but it's technically being used as an adjective. For example, let's pretend you're a grandma, and someone did something nice for you. You might write them a card to say thank you. Thank you is two words, so you may be concerned about attempting to make this an adjective because readers will be completely unaware that these words go together to describe the appropriate noun. Fear not. You can (and by can I mean you have to because grammar says) simply hyphenate the term.

In other words, you can write a thank-you card.

Now I know this seems a little odd, and you don't see it very often. You see it more commonly with numerical terms, like a three-mile run (ugh) or a quarter-inch cable. It's the same concept. If you don't hyphenate the terms, technically the adjectives there are mile and inch. You're not going for three one-mile runs. You're going for one three-mile run. See how much that hyphen simplified things? Similarly, Grace Potter doesn't have an inch cable that she's looking for a quarter of. She's asking for her quarter-inch cable.

And you, Grandma, are not writing a you card. You're writing a thank-you card.

Some of you sharp readers may have noticed I also hyphenated super-amazing. That's because it's important to note that the power to hyphenate adjectives is not just amazing. It's super-amazing. Yes, that means you should be doing that whenever you use the word super in that way.

I'm very sorry to introduce another brand-new rule you're now aware you're not following.

A synopsis of my current project

Here's a rough outline of my current book:

A kid goes to camp, and they eat food. There's a bad guy who eats food, and a cop has some physiologically improbable sex with some girl, which both follows and precedes them eating food. Also there's some baseball, and the kid's probably Jewish or something, and everyone eats a lot of food.

Does that give you an idea of the plot? Yeah, me either.

And I'm done.

Now with this man she was a complete woman.

Upholstery

I think this one broke my brain. I actually had to look it up to make sure it wasn't a thing because I was baffled as to how someone could honestly write this.

They upholstered their firearms.

I believe the word he was looking for was drew. But I see how that could be a tricky one.

Side note: I'm really hoping upholstered firearms become a thing.

Listen to my face

I sat down and smiled quietly.

How exactly would one smile loudly? Does this guy not know the meaning of the word smile?

Come to think of it, I'm not sure this guy knows the meanings of point of view or plot either.

Fun with translations

One of my fun jobs is called post editing, which means looking at stuff that Google Translate has "translated" and fixing it so it actually makes sense. Here's a sentence I came across today:

And if you just turn if the lift that was just because I envy.

What it meant to say was:

And if you just tuned in, if you're one of those people who just woke up, I envy you.

This is rather different.

Who is "everybody"?

I'm starting to think that when middle-aged, middle-class white men say that their book is for "everybody," it's not that they really think women or minorities are going to read their racist, misogynistic crap. It's just that "everybody" really only refers to other middle-aged, middle-class white men like themselves.

Point of view primer

Here's a quick lesson for those of you who don't understand point of view.

There are three types:

First person. I went to the fair.

Second person. You went to the fair.

Third person. He went to the fair.

Pretty simple, right? Yes, it is simple. People don't write in second person, so either your narrator is I or she/he/it.

If you're writing in third person, you have some options on how much information you want to give the readers.

Third person limited means that while the narrator is she/he/it and not I, readers only get to know the narrator's thoughts, feelings, etc. Think Harry Potter.

Third person omniscient means that the narrator is its own omnipotent entity that knows all and sees all. Therefore, readers get to know the thoughts and feelings of any and all characters. Think Winnie the Pooh.

Current trends in fiction overwhelmingly favor third person limited. I assume this is because it takes away the ability to say, "Little did he know..."

Now you might be thinking, "I'm going to write a book in third person, so who cares if it's omniscient or limited?" Let me answer that question for you.

Everyone cares.

Once you choose to write in third person limited, you cannot for any reason switch to omniscient. Limited means readers only get to hear the thoughts and feelings of the main character, so imagine how jarring it would be to suddenly get someone else's thoughts. It would be like hearing voices, only in book form. Yes, some authors do switch main characters from chapter to chapter, but when they do, they become limited to the thoughts and feelings of the new main character.

If you are going to write a book, you absolutely must understand the differences in point of view. You cannot write in third person sorta limited but sometimes semiomniscient. This is not only bad writing; it is inexcusable.

The end.

For a while

Ever wondered about the difference between awhile and a while? If you're like most people, you haven't because you always just use awhile. But there's good news. I'm here to present you with another grammar tip you probably won't remember or use! I'm sure you're as excited as I am.

The rules for awhile and a while are pretty simple as long as you don't think about them too much.

A while is an amount of time; therefore, it's a noun.

Awhile is an adverb.

While we all know the parts of speech, this still may not be a very practical explanation. So here's the quick and dirty version:

Awhile is used after a verb.

A while is used after for or another word like that.

Observe:

I listened to One Direction for a while, but then I realized it was crap and turned it off.

They dated awhile, even though she knew he was trouble when he walked in.

See? One word after a verb, two words after for.

Yes, it's nitpicky. It's grammar. That's kind of its thing.

Sentence structure

For some reason I see this sort of sentence structure a lot:

A sturdy four-wheel drive, the old man probably wanted the truck for himself.

First off, if you write all your sentences with this structure, your writing will sound really awkward. Don't do it.

Second, this is probably not what you actually want to say. Here's the basic overview of how this sort of sentence works:

[description of thing], [thing] [rest of sentence]

So while it's definitely noteworthy that the old man is a sturdy four-wheel drive, I'm fairly certain you meant something more like this:

The old man probably wanted the sturdy four-wheel drive for himself.

I know that doesn't sound as fancy, but it also doesn't sound as stupid.

You're welcome.

IEEG

Have you ever wondered about the difference between i.e. and e.g.? Well, here's how to get around it. Basically, you probably mean "for example." Just say that.

Done.

Not convinced? OK, then here goes:

You probably know that i.e. and e.g. stand for Latin things. Let's not bother with that. Let's just stick to the meanings.

i.e.: in other words
e.g.: for example

For some reason we're all convinced we should always use i.e. I don't know why. We just are. Unfortunately, we're wrong. Well, to be fair, you're wrong. I'm not. That's why I'm writing this post and you're not.

One way to remember the difference is that e.g. can be used with etc. You're listing some examples, but there are probably more. However, i.e. means you are simply rewording or clarifying what you've just said, so you can't use etc. Still confused? Here are some examples:

I grew up watching baseball while listening to three generations of Carays (i.e., Harry, Skip, and Chip).

In this example I stated that there were three generations, so the part in parentheses is a clarification, not a list of examples. I listened to Harry Caray, Skip Caray, and Chip Caray. There are no other relevant Carays in this story; therefore, it would not make sense to use either etc. or i.e.

In contrast:

While it's still early in the season, a couple of weak spots have already emerged in the Braves' lineup (e.g., Dan Uggla).

Here I mentioned "a couple of weak spots," but I only gave one. Clearly this is an example of one possible weak spot and not a clarification, which is why e.g. works here. Yes, I could have used etc., but why bother? You all knew I meant B.J. Upton anyway.

The rusty old early-1900s Smith & Wesson .22 caliber long rifle on the wall

Anton Chekhov once said this:

Remove everything that has no relevance to the story. If you say in the first chapter that there is a rifle hanging on the wall, in the second or third chapter it absolutely must go off. If it's not going to be fired, it shouldn't be hanging there.

That's not to say you shouldn't be descriptive. You should--as long as it's relevant. If it's not, why the hell are you telling me?

For example, my current book spent a page detailing a man's high school baseball career and how he got injured in Vietnam. The book is not about baseball or Vietnam. It takes place many years after high school. And the character speaks one line and is not mentioned either before or after this description. Why the hell would I care about his high school baseball career? That's right. I wouldn't.

There are a lot of really great, successful writers who describe the hell out of things. And that's great for them. But even Tolkien and Stephen King know you have to draw the line somewhere. 

Another brilliant questionnaire

What two main impression where you left with?

1. impressions
2. were

Because I said so

Tip of the day: you don't need a comma before because. It is not a conjunction. Why? I don't know. It's too early to go into long, drawn-out discussions that nobody really cares about. Just don't use a comma before because. OK? Thanks.

Happy Friday!

Wordiness

I am astonished but not surprised.

Yes, this basically sums up my newest book. In case you were wondering, here's the definition of astonish thanks to our good friends at Merriam-Webster:

to strike with a sudden sense of surprise or wonder especially through something unexpected or difficult to accept as true or reasonable :  surprise greatly.

This book started out at 100,000 words and will probably end up at about 50,000 by the time I cut out all this bullshit.

Delusions

Here's how my new book starts:

As I get off the bus, it dropped me off at a park. I found myself at the middle of the park. 

Yeah, I realize that's only two sentences. But is that really how you want to start your book? Here's a peek at how much better it gets:

I proceeded into the kitchen, to say hello to my wife. She gives me smooch and hug. I take it and smile, and then hug her lovingly back. I turn her around & hold her from behind & pull her hair back. I start kissing her neck & she starts to giggle. My right hand caressing her butt as my left makes its way to her “love-box”

Past tense, present tense, and progressive tense. Ampersands. Missing words. All of these things are even more offensive than the term "love-box."

Also, I learned this from the questionnaire:

I am told, I have trouble with commas.

Yes. Yes, you do.

This book is going to be a best-seller. It's also going to be a soon-to-be movie. And it's written on pages that are six inches wide with one-inch margins on each side.

This has to be a joke.

This week's top ten most frequently searched words according to Merriam-Webster.com:

1. bigot
2. fascism
3. butt
4. sex
5. culture
6. empathy
7. pedantic
8. irony
9. topography
10. socialism

I guess that's one way around it

It was literally like the wind had been knocked out of her.

By definition, it cannot be literally like anything. It can be literally something or like something, but not both.

I can't figure out if this is better or worse than simply using literally. On one hand, the author clearly understands that this is a figure of speech; the wind has not actually been knocked out of her. On the other hand, it's profoundly stupid.

Either way, it literally makes me sad.

Myriad

Hey, guess what. You can all go back to using the word myriad as a noun. Some people recently decided that it was not a noun but an adjective, meaning you could only say something like:

The new year presented myriad opportunities.

But a quick look into the etiology of the word informs us that, in fact, the word was actually a noun first. So go ahead. Say a myriad of opportunities if you want. Turns out that we're all right. So just this once...

Emphasis

There seems to be a lot of confusion over the best way to emphasize words or phrases.

Don't you LOVE this song?

Don't you love this song?

Don't you love this song?

Don't you love this song?

Don't you looooove this song?

Don't you love this song?!

Or occasionally you get someone who just can't contain themselves and tries to combine them all:

Don't you LOOOOVE this song?!

Needless to say, that's overkill.

Here's the thing about emphasis, though. Sometimes it's so obvious you don't even need to point it out. For example, the word love is sort of emphatic already. You don't just like the song or think it's OK; you love it. So technically, I would probably change the sentence to this:

Don't you love this song?

Yes, it's that simple, friends.

However, I understand that sometimes you are just soooo excited that you NEED to emphasize something in your writing. So let's make this easy and consistent.

Use italics.

That's it. Don't use all caps. That's a colloquial way of screaming. Don't use bold or underline. Don't use extra punctuation, and don't add extra letters.

Just use italics.

Thank you.

It's too early for this

On page three of my new book I'd already hit a "little did he know."

Later, on page five, I learned about someone's "gyrating package."

Great. Just great.

Maroon or whatever

Hi, everyone. Here's a friendly spelling lesson.

Burgundy is a darkish reddish color.

Burgandy is the incorrect spelling of this word.

No.

Blond (male, n.)
Blonde (female, n.)
Blond (adj.)

No. I'm sorry. Just choose a fucking spelling and stick with it.

I suppose it had to be done

Have you ever been watching Game of Thrones or reading Song of Ice and Fire and thought, "You know what would make this better? If the sex and violence weren't so subtle and artistically rendered"?

Fear not, my friends. Imagine a world in which these works featured not humans but orcs.

Apparently that's what I'm reading right now.

How to use a semicolon

This is not hard.

Semicolons are used to connect two complete sentences.

Take two complete sentences, put a semicolon between them, and voila! You're a literary genius! I'm not sure why this baffles so many people; it's as easy as using a period.

Please get this right, guys. Please.

Allaween

Here's a real treat for you guys today. This is part of the glossary from the book I was just offered:

Representatyional sistem, the internal experience in the 5 sense ; seeing visual0 hearing (auditory) feeling 9kinestetic) tasting(gustatory) and smelling 9 olfactory

Neurolical level The logical level of experience environment behavior capability belief identity and spirit.

Limbic system a complex part of the brain include the hippocampus amidgala hipotalamus

Left hemisphere the left side of the brain responsabile for processing of logical informationlinear info Kinestethik

The sense of feeling tactic sensing physical internal body sensation emotional and esperience sensation.

Hemisphere of the brain referring to halves of the brain separated by the corpus callosum the righ from the left \Gustatory referring to the sense of taste Eye accessing cues, movement of the of a person’s eyes that indicate the representational system used Corpus callosum

that separate the left from the righ of the brain A network of fiber allaween the hemisphere to communicate between the wit each other Auditory the sense of earing

I did not change anything, including formatting. This is actually what I was given to edit. 

Note: allaween means "allowing." No, seriously. 

*Brain explodes*

The room is quiet as both of them sit in shocked silence as a clock ticks noisily.

Seriously, dude. Just read that again. Are you sure that's the sentence you want to go with there?

Page 18

Ladies and gentlemen...

As I predicted on page 18 of The Worst Book Ever Written...

THE ALIENS ARE ACTUALLY HUMANS FROM THE FUTURE!

I, Tarzan

This particular example made me take a break from my screaming and cursing to giggle ridiculously.

"Lieutenant, I want you to lead the way."

The lieutenant gives him a wink. “I, Captain.” 

So does he really assume sailors are saying, "I, I, sir"? He never thought about what that might mean or why that might be stupid? Really?

All I want to feel is the wind in my eyes

I may have to make this book my first total riff ever. There's just so much wonderful about it. Here's another great one that made me giggle hysterically:

She runs a hand through her brown, windblown hair to reveal a set of deep blue eyes. 

Where exactly are her eyes that running her hands through her hair would reveal them? 

Throw Momma From the Train, etc.

OK, we all get this one, right? And I'm not going to share every example of this because people do it so often that I'd just go insane. But for some reason this one struck me as particularly confusing:

He attaches a handmade metal hoop to his head lined with bulky sensors.

After a minute I understood that the metal hoop must have bulky sensors. But who knows? Maybe his head is lined with bulky sensors. Given the writing I have so far experienced with this one, anything is possible.

Commas, my friend

Time to earn your freedom guys!

What's a freedom guy? I want one!

Or you could just say this

When people don't know how to write emotions, they rely on tired, overused, often melodramatic cliches. Some variation of this one occurs in pretty much all bad books:

He screamed in anguish, "Why me?"

Of course, this makes me wonder why we don't all just use this video instead:

It's so much more subtle.

I miss vampires

I seriously almost cried when I got my next assignment. I may not be able to handle this. Here's who the book is for:

I wrote this story for ages thirteen and up but there are areas that might be difficult for some people to understand. Since it is military oriented it's probably targeted more to the male audience and it's defiantly for the science fiction reader.

Military oriented. Great. Because I want to read another book about a fucking military pilot. Especially one that might be difficult to understand. Because he doesn't say specifically who may have difficulty understanding it, I assume he means everyone.

Also, I'm not a huge fan of defiant science fiction.

Here's his statement about why he wrote the book:

My desire to write this story started one night after having a very vivid dream. I wrote it down and named it, "The Hail Mary Mission." I didn't know at the time it would change my life but I was driven to understand how an event could happen. Writing a prolog only drew me in further. Who were the aliens? What happens afterwards? With so many great ideas coming to mind, I decided to dedicate my life to complete it. Some may say it's to short but I focused mainly on quality and not quantity. I also wanted something that was thought provoking, mysterious, intense and emotional. The kind of book you can't stop thinking about long after you finish it.

Oh, boy. Let's take a look at this one a bit closer.

My desire to write this story started one night after having a very vivid dream.

So did you have the dream during an afternoon nap? Also note that very is unnecessary here.

I wrote it down and named it, "The Hail Mary Mission."

The quotes indicate that this is not a book but perhaps an episode of a TV show. Also, let's imagine the opening line of Moby Dick, shall we? Call me, Ishmael. Oh, no, wait. There's no comma there. So why did you feel you needed one?

EDIT: I'm still giggling about this one. I feel that we could insert either Blondie's "Call Me" or that one chick's "Call Me Maybe" here. The fact that I made a reference that connects "Call Me Maybe" with Moby Dick amuses me greatly.

I didn't know at the time it would change my life but I was driven to understand how an event could happen. 

I'm just itching to know how writing a shitty novel has changed your life. Oh, that's not the end of the sentence? OK, we'll add a comma before but and keep going. I too understand how an event could happen. Events happen all the time. In fact, events are happening at this very moment.

Writing a prolog only drew me in further. 

This is what prologs do, so congratulations. Except that we spell it prologue. Minor detail.

Who were the aliens? What happens afterwards?

We also prefer afterward. But regardless, I'm also eager to know what happens after...wait, you mean after the prologue? You, the writer, did not know what would happen after the prologue?

With so many great ideas coming to mind, I decided to dedicate my life to complete it. 

What great ideas? The ideas of misspelling prolog or writing about aliens? And you really dedicated your life to this without realizing you were misspelling the word prolog?

Some may say it's to short but I focused mainly on quality and not quantity.

No, you didn't. You just used the wrong to. Side note: at 60,000-some words, it is to short.

I also wanted something that was thought provoking, mysterious, intense and emotional. 

You know how often I hear these words in client questionnaires? Often. Oh, so often. You know how often I use these words? Stunningly less often.

The kind of book you can't stop thinking about long after you finish it.

You realize this is not a complete sentence, right?

And finally, after explaining how he loves using descriptive words to create an intense, emotional, et. al. story, we get this gem:

I have difficulty writing out how a person would for example, "Worry." Expressing that in facial expressions or body action is quite challenging for me.

Following this is an explanation of how he will not be instituting any additional changes that may be suggested.

I...just...can't.

Trending...

Justin Bieber Turns Himself Into Toronto Police

This is currently trending according to my Facebook page, and I see why! How did he turn himself into a police officer? That's like magic!

Oh...he turned himself in to the Toronto Police. Because he's an asshole and he assaulted someone. Hm. That's much less magical.

Channel Number Five

Chanel No. 5:

Channel Number Five:

So your grandmother smelled like inexcusably bad writing and journalism?

Picture this

He lifted his two legs, one at a time, as he walked from the car, through the gate, down the sidewalk, and up to the back steps of the house.

She does then detail walking up the stairs and through the door into the house, if you were wondering.

But seriously, picture him lifting his two legs two at a time. Way funnier, right?
 

I wrote knowingly

For some reason the word knowingly drives me nuts. In general, any word ending in -ingly is irritating. It's already an adjective. Why must you make it an adverb? There have to be other adverbs in the English language. Pick one of those.

Anyway, knowingly is especially annoying to me, mostly because it usually means nothing.

"I like ice cream," I said.
"Ice cream is delicious," he replied knowingly.

It doesn't tell you anything about how he said it. Does it mean he was confident or smug? Those are descriptions. Knowing is not a descriptive description.

For some reason I become especially irritated by the phrase smiled knowingly. Any time I read something like she smiled knowingly, I want to punch her in the face, whether or not I know who she is or if it's even possible to punch her in the face.

There's nothing inherently wrong with it. It's just annoying.