vwl
-
Posts
608 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by vwl
-
-
There are lots of postings by people who have already read and enjoyed Falling Off a Log, but it would be nice to know anyone who has not yet read any of Driver's stories -- and their reactions.
-
This link describes the sordid story:
http://deadspin.com/padres-apologize-to-san-diego-gay-mens-chorus-for-anthe-1778174280
After Billy Bean's remarks (he was the second major-league baseball player to come out) I believe it was just a mistake that quite naturally humiliated the gay men's chorus.
-
Keep it dusted.
-
What happened to the Hardy Boys? I know that they detected in an environment that was out of date when I was a kid, but they were still enjoyable -- and probably still are. The books are not at all serious, probably not PC, but they can get boys started.
-
I reread few stories, except when I'm editing them, but the stories of Driver going back over a decade are well worth reading again. They are wonderful coming-of-age and coming-to-maturity tales. They are timeless, very well written, and the characters are memorable.
Driver has shunned publicity after being harassed for writing these stories, but they have been preserved and maintained at the storiesbydrive.net site.
And to start off, I highly recommend Falling off a Log: http://www.storiesbydriver.net/foal.htm
-
There is a another sequel on its way. Marcus McNally has written 22 chapters, though none have yet been published.
-
From English author Evelyn Waugh’s letter to American author Thomas Mertonon Aug. 13, 1948, quoted in Mary Frances Coady’s “Merton and Waugh: A Monk, a Crusty Old Man & The Seven Storey Mountain” (2015):
Never send off any piece of writing the moment it is finished. Put it aside. Take on something else. Go back to it a month later and re-read it. Examine each sentence and ask “Does this say precisely what I mean? Is it capable of misunderstanding? Have I used a cliché where I could have invented a new and therefore asserting and memorable form? Have I repeated myself and wobbled round the point when I could have fixed the whole thing in six rightly chosen words? Am I using words in their basic meaning or in a loose plebeian way?” . . . The English language is incomparably rich and can convey every thought accurately and elegantly. The better the writing the less abstruse it is. Say “No” cheerfully and definitely to people who want you to do more than you can do well.
All this is painfully didactic—but you did ask for advice—and there it is.
-
There's a lot of fresh and enjoyable writing in this story.
Well done, chrysoprase.
-
I'm currently editing an Englishman's story, and the differences in our two languages can be perplexing. They use prepositions differently than we do. If they use 'on' where we use 'in', should I correct it, or not? They also 'park up' their cars, while we simply 'park' them; I guess we're a more frugal country when it comes profligate world-use. But that sort of thing does play the dickens with editing. Oh, wait -- we're talking about Englishmen here. That should be 'play the Dickens,' huh?
C
I think if the meaning is clear, you should leave the British on their side of the Atlantic (and the Aussies on their side of the Pacific). Sometimes in editing, though, I will make a change ('on' to 'in', for example) because I don't know if the Aussie or Brit has made an error. If the meaning is not clear or is misleading across the waters, then something needs to be changed. I had a recent instance where someone got 'onto' a board in order to pursue a change. I assumed they were elected or appointed to the board. But that was not the case; they were onto the board to object to something; we in North America use 'she was onto me for my bad behavior' in the same sense as 'onto a board' was intended. Anyway, some rewording clarified the text.
-
Like
-
I ran into this, which has nice nuggets of suggestion for both writers and editors:
http://madgeniusclub.com/2016/02/14/editors-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly/
-
Loathing the man and loathing his view of the Constitution should be kept separate. In terms of the man, look for the (likely) tribute to come from Justice Ginsburg, his colleague on the court and the complete opposite philosophically.
-
In a long interview at a Federalist Society meeting, Scalia said that he has never expressed his private views on gay marriage, abortion and the like.
His point in the remarks at Georgetown and elsewhere is that the decisions about such issues should be made by the elected representatives of the people, not by unelected judges, serving, in many cases, for life. To him, how decisions are made are more important in most cases than what decisions are made.
To understand Scalia, one needs to understand the difference.
-
Graeme makes a valid observation. If there is a split on an issue at the Circuit Court level a 4-4 vote at the Supreme Court merely leaves the split intact until a case comes forward at some future time that rises to the Supreme Court level. [The Supreme Court actually takes only a small fraction of the cases that seek its decisions.] If there is no split at the circuit level, then the tie at SCOTUS essentially affirms the lower-court decision.
One of the upcoming key cases this term may not be affected because the liberal Justice Kagan has recused herself, so a tie is not numerically possible.
With respect to Cole's point, relatively few laws rise to the level of Constitutional scrutiny or are decided differently at the Circuit Court level (on issues that involve Constitutional issues, such as searches and seizures in the electronic age or gun control). Justice Scalia, by the way, had no problem with different decisions at the state level, particularly with respect to gay marriage. He thought the people of each state could decide the issue in their own way. What he objected to was establishing a Constitutional right to it. Laws at the state level can and do differ on many things, some nearing Constitutional questions; these are, as the late Justice Brandeis said, the laboratories of democracy.
-
And you'd imbibe to that, too.
I'll drink to that!
C
-
Apart from edits and polishing, the major change will be in the relationship between Jake and Robbie's son, making the causes of their conflict more realistic, I hope.
-
Here's the video of his winning the Intel competition a few years back.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmVzs3-GNBc
He came out a couple of years ago.
-
A truly fresh and energetic story over at Nifty. Highly recommended despite a need for some final editing.
http://www.nifty.org//nifty/gay/beginnings/mafia/mafia-1.html
-
Chris,
Windows 8.1 is no big deal for an upgrade. But I'd go directly to Windows 10, which seems as stable as Windows 7. If you don't like the 'Metro' mode, versus the desktop mode of Windows 7, then spring $4.99 for a program called Start10 (or Start8 if you stay at Windows 8.1) With the Start10 combination, you will be in fairly familiar territory.
-
-
Chapter 11 is now posted: http://www.gayauthors.org/story/diogenes/aboutcarl/11
with a tribute to Brokeback Mountain
-
Ditto.
Where does the word 'ditto' come from, anyway?
And the questions: will Donald Trump get trumped? Will Hillary become warm and lovable? Will the Seattle Mariners win the world series? Will one religion of peace -- Islam -- make up with another religion of peace -- Christianity?
Ah, the possibilities.
-
Sneaking in today at the bottom of the AD main page in the short story section is another excellent story by Cole Parker: The Farm Boy
-
The fine story Love on the Rocks has completed and is being moved to Roamin Reader
Scan to donate
On Bathrooms and Johnny Manziel
in News & Views
Posted
We've existed -- well, as far as I know -- in a don't-ask-don't-tell environment, so I'm not sure what problem the government is trying to solve. Clearly, if a facility is single-use, the door can be locked and privacy maintained irrespective of whether it says men, women or restroom on the door. It is only with communal facilities that any problem arises, but does the problem really rise to the level of a Federal 'edict' that is serious enough to overcome the desire for privacy.
I don't think it's the transgender people who will cause the problem. No, it is the pervert -- probably a male claiming to be a woman -- with an iPhone, taking pictures for the internet or worse who will really cause the problems. Since there's no registry of transgender people, there would be no way to exclude him.
Don't ask, don't tell worked. Why raise a ruckus that may backfire against the LGBT community. [in contrast, don't ask, don't tell was insufficient for gay rights.]