That's funny, and you're right. However, that's using the device of short sentences to build expectation. It's the people who think all sentences should be written this way that @minstrel (and I) growl at. Squirrels do growl, apparently, as do owls.
Not French, I know, but I suggest you avoid Irvine Welch's Trainspotting. I'll give a taste from the very first chapter: The sweat wis lashing oafay Sick Boy; he wis trembling. Ah wis jist sitting thair, focusing oan the telly, tryin no tae notice the ****. He wis bringing me doon. Ah tried tae keep ma attention oan the Jean-Claude Van Damme video.
Ah yeah, Trainspotting. Couldn't get through it. Any character with a phonetic accent comes off as a ridiculous caricature to me
Well it was a massive bestseller, and presumably not only in Glasgow, but like you, how any non-Glaswegians managed to get through all 344 pages is beyond me.
When I see them, I always find myself thinking that the author correctly used a semicolon, and that some "Americans are terrified of semicolons!" editor removed it. So they send me spiraling into conspiracy theories. That's not good. Edited to add: I suppose they also annoy me because they're technically-incorrect grammar that's totally unnecessary. All you have to do is change the comma to a semicolon, and the sentence is suddenly correct, without the "sound" changing at all. So to me, there's no reason for them. Many other technically-incorrect choices actually change the mood or pace or "sound" of the piece, so there's an end that justifies the means--it looks like you meant to do it. A comma splice can look like you just made a mistake, rather than a decision. I'm not saying that everyone else agrees; for example, if someone IS uncomfortable with semicolons, then the sentence isn't going to feel the same to them with a semicolon rather than a comma. But I'm entirely comfortable with them, so it irritates me. Hence, pet peeve.
I agree with you in principle, but damn. That book would have had an entirely different impact if it had been written in standard English. Welsh has pretty much captured the way folk think and speak in that part of the world. He's done it so well. I can't imagine it being written any other way. Sometimes dialect is so strong and so important that it has to be written as spoken.
I wouldn't argue with this for a second, but as someone who reads very slowly already, the last thing I need is having to re-read sentences and words over and over because I didn't catch them the first time. I really would find it very hard work, in an entirely literal sense.
Maybe I'm okay with Trainspotting because I live here (now) where folks talk like that and the dialect makes perfect sense to me. It might be harder if it had a foreign sound to it.
It bugs the living crap out of me that so many people don't like semicolons. The problem is one of education: they should have been properly taught to use semicolons (and colons, dashes, etc.) when they were in grade school. If they weren't, it's not the writer's fault. If the writer uses punctuation correctly, then it's up to the reader to keep up. I'd hate to be told I can't use words like "alluvial" or "periphery" or "descant" just because many people don't know what they mean. I refuse to dumb down my vocabulary to accommodate the most limited reader, and I refuse to dumb down my punctuation for the same reason. I learned to read and write by reading work that was over my head when I was a kid, and I appreciate the educational value of doing such reading.
I've read a load of Anne Rice over the years, and every time she mentions that word, I cringe. There's a load of other stuff in her work that makes me cringe too, but that one is top of my list. Even before I started writing myself, I had a feeling it was being seriously overused and abused.
I just saw Trainspotting the other day; great movie, not exactly sure what was said, but great movie.
I'm from the north west of England and even I struggled. Try this one on for size - this guy's a comic genius!
I agree with everything you said with one caveat regarding archaic language or "big" words. I encounter a lot of otherwise decent writing in which the author will drop single items like "The woman spoke iridescently" in the middle of a paragraph that doesn't include any other big language, so "iridescently" (or whatever word is used) ends up sticking out like a sore thumb, and I'm always left with mental imagery of the author using a synonym finder to replace more regular language at random. If the tone of the piece is such that a lot of advanced language is used, then by all means go for it. The author is serving the story in that case, which is what every author must try to do. However, I think the complaint, at least in my mind, is directed at writers who doctor their run-of-the-mill stuff with random "fancy" words that don't necessarily even make sense. I mean, how the hell does a person speak iridescently anyway? It's distracting and self-indulgent on the author's part. Another example of what I'm talking about: "John zipped to the store, picked out a pair of frozen pizzas, and returned to his basement where, for the rest of the night, he sprawled on the couch stuffing his face. He fell asleep on the couch around eleven and woke sometime after midnight to the doorbell ringing. He staggered in a half-daze to the door to find Lizzy on his porch. When he saw her, he couldn't suppress a coquettish grin." 10 points to anyone who can pick out the word not like the others! In this particular bit, a simpler adjective suffices.
@Dr. Mambo, that's why writing is an art. Writers need to exercise good judgment about what kinds of words to use in what contexts.
Woah now, calm down, we still don't know what 10 points are worth. Are there point options that come with this? How about insider point trading? Plus you took the good guess. Jerk. John, the rest are just he, right?
Don't mind me, I was just being coquettish about it. I think the use of couch two sentences in a row is the problem.
My students accomplish things in English that I couldn't even begin to do in Japanese, but I can still laugh. A few years ago, one class was learning to do summary paragraphs, where they had to paraphrase the reading that was provided to them. For many of them, just getting the meaning of the original text requires some dictionary work, so putting the idea into their "own words" can be pretty tough. The article was about not owning a television, and the original text read something like, "I eventually found that my experiment had crossed the line into a new lifestyle." One student's paraphrase came out something like, "One day my test went across the equator of my life." I could see where the student got it, but still had to laugh.
Once they're yours you can do what you'd like with them. If they become yours. But in all seriousness, I posted that last bit right after I finished a riveting round of "Produce Home Run Derby" (it's exactly what it sounds like it is) at work, and the particular group of fourth graders I was with really struggles to listen to the staff, so we were using an old trick on them. "Aww, dude! You didn't follow directions! Minus 10 points." "Whoa, nice contact with that plantain! Plus 5 points." No one knows how many there are or what they're for or who's in the lead. The kids just really want to get points. Actually, that really bothered me when I wrote it...
Part of me always admired how students' ingenuity and energy expenditure in cutting corners on homework assignment sometimes far exceeded the actual effort required to just do the work. I do miss the classroom some days.
