The Ugliest Truth - Bad Writing

[orlok]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

In the UK braces are suspenders.

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Oh yes, really true. UK braces = US suspenders. You don't have to believe me because I am not from the UK. But you have to believe my wife because she is from the UK.

It was the wording in your post that was confusing. I thought you were saying in the UK braces are called suspenders, which as we have established beyond doubt they are not (and I'm from the UK too ).

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by orlok

It was the wording in your post that was confusing. I thought you were saying in the UK braces are called suspenders, which as we have established beyond doubt they are not (and I'm from the UK too ).

But now that we know that braces = suspenders we can move forward.

[Freeshadow]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

But now that we know that braces = suspenders we can move forward.

Yeah we should cease to suspend and embrace our chance to do so

[DrNefario]

I thought dental braces were called retainers in the US?

[BeccaPrice]

Retainers are a special category of braces. At least when my son was going through it, the braces were cemented onto the teeth. the retainer was something he slept in (til he lost it) but was removed during the day.

[4691mls]

Originally Posted by BeccaPrice

Retainers are a special category of braces. At least when my son was going through it, the braces were cemented onto the teeth. the retainer was something he slept in (til he lost it) but was removed during the day.

I know orthodontic technology has changed, so I may not be current -
when I had them back in the late 70's/early 80's, braces were the metal things that were actually glued onto your teeth; after those were removed, then you got a retainer to help keep the teeth in place.

this page has a photo of retainers:
http://metalmouthmedia.net/category/retainers/

[JSWolf]

People, we've moved on from dental implements. Give it a rest.

[Dr. Drib]

Yes, back on topic, please.

Don
(Moderator)

[DiapDealer]

Here's the most recent example of what I would call "bad writing" that I've encountered. This passage caused me to immediately put down a book I was rather enjoying up to that point:

"The sound of gunfire lit the afternoon sky as they prepared to leave."

My jaw dropped. I've tried to forget about it and finish the book several times now (as I was interested in the outcome), but I just can't get past it. I even tried to pretend the author did it purposely as some sort of literary synesthesia experiment. No dice. I can overlook bad cliches and misspelled words (even when the misspelling changes the meaning of a sentence), but stuff like this?... Sounds lighting the sky?... Showstopper. Game over.

[Coops]

Originally Posted by Fat Abe

The politically correct phrase for a book that does not succeed in the eye of the beholder is less than brilliant. And, this could either mean that the author failed in developing/presenting a story, or the subject he/she chose failed to attract enough interest on the part of the reader.

I'm fairly certain you're joking, but if i'm wrong then I defy you to read Robin Cook's 'Toxin' and not feel an irresistable urge to spew a mahoosive stream of invective, blasphemy, wide ranging and innovative cussing, and pejorative, indeed, at such a f@ ckin' awful travesty of a book.

My one and only Amazon book review.
http://www.amazon.com/review/RTNNLFH...cm_cr_rdp_perm

[Dr. Drib]

'Bad' is a word reserved for things that stink and for things that are inept and for writing that is bad, bad, bad - sometimes bad to the bone [cliche!] and sometimes 'surface bad,' as in lousy grammar skills and non-existant proofreading habits - wherein one allows a piece of work to be available for public consumption when it should actually be buried behind the barn or deposited in a nearby cesspool. (If you live in the city, then may I humbly suggest a nearby sewer?)

I have no problem at all in conveying (through writing) that his or her book or short story is bad, as long as I list what I feel are legitimate reasons.

Sometimes, my writing may stink (it's that bad). I would suggest that perhaps your writing also stinks. (The 'your' in the previous sentence is directed toward anyone who may be reading this post.)

If a writer can't take constructive criticism (and that's the key phrase, by the way), then that person should stay home and live a life of reclusive non-existence playing tiddly-winks.



Don

[barutanseijin]

Sometimes a writer has a novel take on things, but clumsy mechanics. Other writers make lovely sentences but put them together in banal structures. Really bad writers can't do either.

That said, i have a certain admiration for writers just for finishing & getting their work published, even if it's what i consider Total Crap. That gumption is part of the equation, too. Think Confederacy of dunces.

[iain6566]

A couple of years ago I spent a lot of time on short stories, to try and refine my writing style and voice, and also to see if I could get work accepted for publication. I would submit these small masterpieces to writing forums for comment and constructive criticism. It was an eye opener on what people consider valid critique of a work. 90% of the reviewers would pick up on the missing apostrophe (I think you meant army's instead of armies, ho ho ho,) but very few would comment on the actual content.

On one of these forums, I read a short story, all in CAPS and with absolutely no punctuation whatsoever, but it was a stunning piece of writing. Next to it was a piece that had been edited to within an inch of it's life, and yet it was banal, dull and uninteresting.

It was one of the reasons I gave up the writers forums; I found that very few people actually wanted an honest review.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by iain6566

I would submit these small masterpieces to writing forums for comment and constructive criticism. It was an eye opener on what people consider valid critique of a work. 90% of the reviewers would pick up on the missing apostrophe (I think you meant army's instead of armies, ho ho ho,) but very few would comment on the actual content.

So the lesson should be: Proofreading and copy editing is important. Mistakes like that distract from content.
Did you ask people to ignore early-draft errors like that and to focus on content instead?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by iain6566

A couple of years ago I spent a lot of time on short stories, to try and refine my writing style and voice, and also to see if I could get work accepted for publication. I would submit these small masterpieces to writing forums for comment and constructive criticism. It was an eye opener on what people consider valid critique of a work. 90% of the reviewers would pick up on the missing apostrophe (I think you meant army's instead of armies, ho ho ho,) but very few would comment on the actual content.

My view as an author is "get the grammar, spelling and punctuation right and THEN look at the content". Language is an author's toolbox. If you don't know how to use those tools correctly, it doesn't matter what you say; nobody's going to take any notice.