Timewaster's Guide Archive
Departments => Books => Topic started by: Skar on March 25, 2005, 05:12:03 PM
-
edit by SE: just linking the column: http://www.timewastersguide.com/view.php?id=1016
If you're talking about the author of Snow Crash, it's Ne*a*l
Not Neil.
-
Needs a link to the forums. I'll comment later--have the interview in a few minutes, and I don't have time to comment properly right now.
-
You know, Skar, you're not really one to talk about accurately spelling names given the original subject of this topic. (Eulogy 19)
As for the article, I was a little miffed about the opening line of the article. It sounds like us girls are being pigdeon-holed by EUOL again. But maybe his non-single status is also forcing him to watch chickflicks like Runaway Bride and he decided to try his hand at adding "new goddesses to the pantheon."
-
It was deliberate. I don't believe that the Undead Old Lady part really deserves to be capitalized.
-
I also took offense to the opening statement. I know very few girls outside of my masters program (which, BTW, is in Children's Lit) who have any interest in children's literature. I also know many men (sans girlfriends) who enjoy reading children's lit and do not even have an English degree, let alone Child Lit or Education.
I happened to think the movies improved the books immensely. I actually happen to be a Jim Carrey fan (I know, I know!), but I did not like his scenes in the movie, probably because I find Count Olaf to be the most annoying villian ever created. The children's scenes, however, were excellent. I liked that the movie added more of a plot. The books seem to consist of "idiot plots," meaning everyone must be an idiot for events to unfold as they do. Granted, this won't stop me from reading each and every one, in the hopes that the next book will have some semblance of an original plot.
-
Mmm...Neal Stephanson.
That man writes faster than I can read.
-
Skar, it's not just that you didn't capitalize, but we don't have a column of eulogies. We do, however, have a EUOLogy.
-
EUOL, consider yourself highly fortunate in the girlfriend department.
Mine forces me to read things like The Da Vinci Code and Steinbeck.
And I still haven't managed to get her reading Hugo or the Lord of the Rings (at least she's planning on reading LotR. She even owns a copy . . .)
-
Meh.
-
Meh.
I'm not sure I can agree with you, but you give a compelling and well reasoned response.
-
balarge faunnel's make very frenacseh bougsaiese.
-
I would just like to point out that the SoUE books are not, in fact, YA. They're juvenile. And yes, there is a difference. Quite a large one, in fact.
I personally have no interest in seeing the movie, because the reason I like the books is that the narrative cracks me up. The stories are decent, but it's the asides that make the books, so there's really no reason I can think of to deal with Jim Carrey for two hours over it.
-
Oh oh, Ent, or JP, I'll take this one.
Freaking owned!
-
I think you guys are being a bit too hostile to EUOL. It's not like someone outside of Children's Literature as a field necessarily has a reason to know the difference. Seriously. I don't know. And frankly, like EUOL, I don't see the importance in NEEDING to know. It's not a lack of caring... ok, yeah, it is a lack of caring. I suppose I will if I ever try to get this manuscript published that is YA or childrens or juvenile or something or other.
It's kind of a macho thing in some ways, the way that EUOL says he only reads it with a girl. Reading isn't a particularly manly pursuit in most circles. Reading books for kids? Come on, how manly can that be? But on a more serious level, EUOL is a professional author of adult fantasy. Not YA or Juvenile or whatever. And Adult Fantasy is what he normally likes. All he's saying is that wanting to get in with his girlfriend is motivation enough to make the move over. It doesn't necessarily mean it's girly. It means it's not his normal cup of tea, but liking a girl who likes it will make him drink it anyway.
You can't expect him to care about everything you care about. And getting grouchy about it doesn't do anything but make you unhappy.
-
Heinlein's YA stuff (as I write this I don't know the exact definition of YA, I'm talking about books like, "Spaceship Galileo" and "Red Planet" as opposed to "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" or "Stranger in a Strange Land") is some of his best.
I think generally in YA you're more free to deal with the basics when it comes to theme, motivation, and plot. Simply because your target audience probably hasn't read much yet or hasn't matured to the point where they can even recoginize the deeper more complicated things that lace "grownup" SF&F.
I for one really enjoy basic themes, plots and motivations when they're done well. I liked them almost no matter what when I was younger but I can still read them as long as they're not cliched garbage.
-
clichéd garbage is the best kind of garbage.
-
The further back you go--like to the 50s, when Heinlein was publishing his "juveniles," which is what they're called by most people I know, gets fuzzy, because YA wasn't really a genre/market/what have you. But in general, the term YA means "Teens." It's stuff that would appeal to teens, generally has teen protagonists (not always), and is geared for a market older than picture books and chapter books and middle readers, but generally more straightforward plot and characterization than adult stuff.
-
I'm fairly familiar with the difference between YA and Juvi, but then I worked in a public library for quite some time.
We never called juvenile literature (/books) "juveniles", though. We'd call it Juvi Lit or Juvi books or just Juvi, but never "juveniles".
Interesting to get a perspective from the other side of the fence, though.
And, as a rule, all the young person "classics" (Dark is Rising, Black Cauldron [whatever that series was called], the Hobbit, Harry Potter, etc.) were Juvi, not YA. I remember that much. A lot of Anime went into YA, though. It was a small niche of a section, designed generally to specific teen-interest stuff. As Stacer said, often with teen protagonists, and frequently dealing with teen issues. The nonfiction was similar in nature, generally only dealing with the types of issues kids would see alot of in high school (dumbed-down books on drugs, sex, self-help books on how to survive HS, etc.)
-
...
it sounds like you guys are disagreeing
Stacer says YA has all that stuff. you say Juvi does. I thought Juvi was younger from what she said (don't expect me to remember it in another conversation though). So when you said the Hobbit was Juvi, I was a bit taken aback. and it's definitely a higher reading level than Harry Potter
-
I'm speaking from the standpoint of a Public Library, which may be different from the standpoint of a Children's Lit editor.
For us, YA = teen (read: High School), and is heavily influenced by interest. We put books there that the teens are going to want, specifically.
Besides, I read The Hobbit in like 4th or 5th grade (about the time I read Dark is Rising), and my brother read it in 2nd. Definitely not YA for us. =þ
-
so... there's no reason to get mad at someone for misusing the terms when there's even professional disagreement about the application of the terms. Thus, I will continue in my nonchalance about the distinction and find insistence on "correct" usage to be pedantic since there isn't a single correct use.
-
I think it's going a little far to say I was mad over your misuse. I wasn't even irked. "Mildly annoyed" might be a more appropriate term.
The reason why is that "fey and "fay" have very different etymologies, and I, personally, think that their distinction in meaning is very enriching. "Fey" comes from "fæge" (hostile - Anglo-Saxon origin), perhaps relating to the word "foe". "Fay" comes from "faie" (fairy - Norman or French origin).
Strange how there's such a division between your views on spelling, and your views on punctuation, though.
-
OK, did we just totally jump from the Mainstream Fantasy thread and bleed into this one? What does Fey vs. Fay have to do with YA fiction vs Juvenile fiction. Get your threads straight man!
-
Quite sorry. I was responding to Saint E.
-
No need--just messing with ya ;).
-
I think it's going a little far to say I was mad over your misuse. I wasn't even irked. "Mildly annoyed" might be a more appropriate term.
The reason why is that "fey and "fay" have very different etymologies, and I, personally, think that their distinction in meaning is very enriching. "Fey" comes from "fæge" (hostile - Anglo-Saxon origin), perhaps relating to the word "foe". "Fay" comes from "faie" (fairy - Norman or French origin).
Strange how there's such a division between your views on spelling, and your views on punctuation, though.
1) I didn't say you were mad. I was addressing stacer's quote, which was very hostile toward EUOL.
2) I'm not sure where you're getting my views on punctuation or it's difference from spelling -- if this were a published work, yes, it'd be important. As it is a casual forum that I don't need to proofread, and I don't need ANYONE ELSE to proofread for me, things can be much more casual, especially when they're such esoteric concerns.
3) If you really want me to address fey/fay, I will: the difference was immaterial to the discussion. The ONLY reason to bring it up seemed to be "man, you must be ignorant not to know the difference there" or else "see! look how smart I am!" since it didn't have anything to do with any point anyone was making.
Yes, please do keep your threads straight. If you did, you would realize that I wasn't making a point about you until you forced me to.
-
1. My apologies. I thought you were addressing me. I guess I should have paid more attention.
2. That actually had nothing to do with the punctuation or spelling of your post. It was about your stand on the usage of "fey" and "fay" v. British/American punctuation.
3. I'm a philologist. I bring the difference up in an attempt to help clarify, as I have a hunch you're not the only one who doesn't know the difference between "fey" and "fay", and I think it's a great distinction for peolpe to know about. Quite contrary to your claim that I thought you "must be ignorant to not know the difference", it was (is) my suspicion that few do, and THAT was the reason I brought it up. To generally edify. Consider it a bit of "useless trivia" if you wish, but as a philologist, I happen to care.
Yes, I see that. Like I said, mae culpa.
-
2. That actually had nothing to do with the punctuation or spelling of your post. It was about your stand on the usage of "fey" and "fay" v. British/American punctuation.
again, were this a published work, the spelling would have needed correcting. As it is a casual forum, the distinction seemed unncessary. I'm very precise about the punctuation in my work because it's a matter of professionalism: the difference between making my company look like a bunch of monkeys demanding money for something they slapped together and a clear, precise system of documentation. If someone were to put the period in the wrong place on the forum, that's not a big deal. In my work where people are paying for the material, then it becomes important. There is no inconsistency. If for some reason, the word "fey" or "fay" appeared in the help files, training manuals, or other documentation, rest assured I would make sure it was correct (though I would worry about it much less then, say "effect" and "affect" since I believe few people using routing software know what either "fey" or "fay" mean).
-
My point is that, after my comment, you intimated that British punctuation would disgruntle you, not just that "incorrect" punctuation would. And then you remained, to use your word, "nonchalant" about the switching of "fey" and "fay".
I am glad to hear you would appreciate the difference in a published work, however.
-
using British punctuation in would disgruntle me in a work published in America yes, but not on a forum. The reason being that it seems more than a little capricious and based on whim to break with the system for little reason other than you think it "looks better." Frankly, it would bother me because a) it jibes Jam and En, and b) British punctuation IS incorrect when you write and publish in America.
-
Now we're back to the argument of whether British Punctuation is okay or not.
My general policy is that if it's consistent, descritpive, and takes nothing away from the language, there's nothing wrong with it.
I'm not going to begin to pretend that my view on the matter is mainstream, however. Maybe I've just been reading too much Middle English.
-
I'm fairly familiar with the difference between YA and Juvi, but then I worked in a public library for quite some time.
We never called juvenile literature (/books) "juveniles", though. We'd call it Juvi Lit or Juvi books or just Juvi, but never "juveniles".
Sorry, I should have been more specific: what I meant was specific to Heinlein's juveniles. I'd call anything younger than YA "middle readers" or "children's literature."
-
I'm speaking from the standpoint of a Public Library, which may be different from the standpoint of a Children's Lit editor.
For us, YA = teen (read: High School), and is heavily influenced by interest. We put books there that the teens are going to want, specifically.
Besides, I read The Hobbit in like 4th or 5th grade (about the time I read Dark is Rising), and my brother read it in 2nd. Definitely not YA for us. =þ
I'd classify The Dark Is Rising and The Hobbit as children's (middle readers) as well, though I'd say I'd probably double up and put a copy of both in YA as well, because they're of interest to teens who may not want to look for them in the children's section. And I agree with you that YA=of interest to teens. Which is why I defined it as (generally) having teen protagonists, etc. Most of what you'd call "problem novels" are YA, though thankfully the market is demanding more complexity than it used to in that department.
-
1) I didn't say you were mad. I was addressing stacer's quote, which was very hostile toward EUOL.
Which actually referred back to previous conversations I've had with him, in which he's been quite proud of the fact that he didn't care about the difference, when there actually is a clear difference for many things, most notably Series of Unfortunate Events, which is what he is calling "YA" in the EUOLogy. I was just frustrated, and tired of repeating myself, and ... just other things.
-
why does it matter that he knows the difference?
-
Because I'm picky. And because if you're referring to it as YA, it's simply wrong. If I were to come on here and start spouting off about gaming as if I were some expert, even though what I know about it comes basically from what's rubbed off on me from you all, I think I'd annoy the lot of you. Well, that's how I feel about it.
-
actually, I wouldn't be bothered a single whit if what you said had absolutely nothing to do with your point. EUOL doesn't claim to be an expert on YA lit. In fact, he is distinctly proud that he is not an expert.
Plus it's possible that the corrections remind him constnatly of his ignorance and that embarasses and annoys him. Thus his defense is not to care. Did you think that maybe being lax about it might be a way to keep the issue from being an issue?
-
Okay, this topic was interesting two pages ago but you have all wandered away into silliness. Can we get back on topic? It was interesting.
-
I think we should just be generally respectful of Stacer in this case. After all, this is her profession we're talking about.
Perhaps it would be more appropriate, rather than using the term "YA", to use the term "YP" for "Young people's" (that's actually what we called the children's branch of the library). That way EUOL doesn't have to admit he's reading Children's Lit, Stacer doesn't have to put up with everyone putting YA and Children's into all the wrong categories, and we can use a simple, catch-all abbreviation.
Whaddyasay?
-
I think you guys are being a bit too hostile to EUOL. It's not like someone outside of Children's Literature as a field necessarily has a reason to know the difference.
You can't expect him to care about everything you care about. And getting grouchy about it doesn't do anything but make you unhappy.
Umm...who was being hostile? I was pointing out an error. I wasn't being malicious for goodness sakes. Last I checked I was allowed to point out a teeny tiny miniscule error without being labeled as hostile...
Oh wait, silly me. I forgot. I'm not allowed to open my MOUTH without being labeled as one of any number of derogatory things...
*Fish realizes that her post has slid into a rant about a completly unrelated frustration, and stops.
-
Fish, I think it's mainly me being referred to as the hostile one. I've since deleted the post, since I am apparently hostile and bitter when I'm annoyed. I had pulled the "I have a master's in children's lit" card, and I apologize to all involved. Can we all just move to some other topic?
-
there was a post that was deleted that I didn't know what deleted. Again, I was just trying to point out that some things shouldn't be argued.
-
Before this topic devolves anymore, I'm locking it.